On 02/05/2014 06:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I had been okay with the manual PGDLLIMPORT-sprinkling approach > (not happy with it, of course, but prepared to tolerate it) as long > as I believed the buildfarm would reliably tell us of the need for > it. That assumption has now been conclusively disproven, though. > The question therefore becomes, what are we going to do instead? > "Keep on doing what we were doing" doesn't strike me as an acceptable > answer.
I'm in complete agreement here. Silent failures we can't test for that might sneak data corruption in are not cool. I'll have a look into ways to making sure that globals with incorrect linkage fail at runtime link time, as is the case for functions. I won't be able to spend much time on it immediately; will take a quick look and if I don't find anything, will follow up post-CF4. I'm kind of horrified that the dynamic linker doesn't throw its toys when it sees this. -- Craig Ringer 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
