Hi, On 2020-10-19 18:29:27 -0700, Mark Dilger wrote: > Please find access/xlog_internal.h refactored in the attached patch > series. This header is included from many places, including external > tools. It is aesthetically displeasing to have something called > "internal" used from so many places, especially when many of those > places do not deal directly with the internal workings of xlog. But > it is even worse that multiple files include this header for no > reason.
> 0002 - Moves RmgrData from access/xlog_internal.h into a new file > access/rmgr_internal.h. I clearly did not waste time thinking of a clever > file name. Bikeshedding welcome. Most files which currently include > xlog_internal.h do not need the definition of RmgrData. As it stands now, > inclusion of xlog_internal.h indirectly includes the following headers: > > After refactoring, the inclusion of xlog_internal.h includes indirectly only > these headers: > > and only these files need to be altered to include the new rmgr_internal.h > header: > > src/backend/access/transam/rmgr.c > src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c > src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c > > Thoughts? It's not clear why the correct direction here is to make xlog_internals.h less "low level" by moving things into headers like rmgr_internal.h, rather than moving the widely used parts of xlog_internal.h elsewhere. > A small portion of access/xlog_internal.h defines the RmgrData struct, > and in support of this struct the header includes a number of other > headers. Files that include access/xlog_internal.h indirectly include > these other headers, which most do not need. (Only 3 out of 41 files > involved actually need that portion of the header.) For third-party > tools which deal with backup, restore, or replication matters, > including xlog_internal.h is necessary to get macros for calculating > xlog file names, but doing so also indirectly pulls in other headers, > increasing the risk of unwanted symbol collisions. Some colleagues > and I ran into this exact problem in a C++ program that uses both > xlog_internal.h and the Boost C++ library. It seems better to me to just use forward declarations for StringInfo and XLogReaderState (and just generally use them mroe aggressively). We don't need the functions for dealing with those datatypes here. Greetings, Andres Freund
