On Monday, July 23, 2012 04:17:39 PM Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:19 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, July 19, 2012 07:18:08 PM Satoshi Nagayasu wrote: > >> I agree with that we need more sophisticated way to share the code > >> between the backend and several utilities (including xlogdump), > >> but AFAIK, a contrib module must allow to be built *without* the core > >> source tree. > > > > I don't think thats reasonable. The amount of code duplication required > > to support that usecase is just not reasonable. Especially if you want > > to support pre 9.3 and 9.3+. > > It seems like the direction this is going is that the xlog reading > stuff should be a library which is used by both the backend and 1 or > more xlog decoding tools. Thats fine for the xlogreader itself - it only uses stuff from headers. The problem is that the xlog debugging/printing infrastructure is pretty much guaranteed to include just about the whole backend...
Andres -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
