Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-12 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alvaro Herrera escribió: > Alvaro Herrera escribió: > > > c. I added the MSVC bits. I tested that most of it works, but the > >various regress executables as well as zic failed to build due to > >lack of libpgcommon at link time. I think I fixed it; I'm waiting on > >new tests to run

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-11 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Alvaro Herrera escribió: > c. I added the MSVC bits. I tested that most of it works, but the >various regress executables as well as zic failed to build due to >lack of libpgcommon at link time. I think I fixed it; I'm waiting on >new tests to run. (This patch is the fixed version).

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-11 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Here's a more finalized version of this. There are two main interesting changes here: 1. postgres_fe.h includes common/fe_memutils.h This means all frontend programs get the #include without having to do it explicitely by themselves. postgres.h includes utils/palloc.h which I used as pr

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Andres Freund
On 2013-02-06 15:51:15 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Okay, here's an attempt at doing it that way. Notably this creates > libpgcommon, a static library, to be used by both frontend and backend. > There's only a frontend file now (fe_memutils.c); the backend side of it > is empty. I verified tha

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Tom Lane escribió: > Simon Riggs writes: > > On 6 February 2013 14:38, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > >> Yeah, I am doing this right now and the "shared" name doesn't seem so > >> good. "libpgframework" sounds decent. So since libpgport comes from > >> src/port, are we okay with src/framework and src/

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Tom Lane
Simon Riggs writes: > On 6 February 2013 14:38, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> Yeah, I am doing this right now and the "shared" name doesn't seem so >> good. "libpgframework" sounds decent. So since libpgport comes from >> src/port, are we okay with src/framework and src/include/framework? > "common

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Phil Sorber
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 6 February 2013 14:38, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> Robert Haas escribió: >>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera >>> wrote: >> >>> > I propose to have a new subdirectory src/include/shared, and two >>> > header files: >> >>> > The

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Simon Riggs
On 6 February 2013 14:38, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas escribió: >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: > >> > I propose to have a new subdirectory src/include/shared, and two >> > header files: > >> > The frontend (pg_malloc) function definitions would live somewhere

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Robert Haas escribió: >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> wrote: > >> > I propose to have a new subdirectory src/include/shared, and two >> > header files: > >> > The frontend (pg_malloc) function definitions would live som

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robert Haas escribió: > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > I propose to have a new subdirectory src/include/shared, and two > > header files: > > The frontend (pg_malloc) function definitions would live somewhere in, > > say, src/shared/fe_memutils.c. For the palloc()

Re: [HACKERS] palloc unification

2013-02-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > There was some discussion about unifying backend and frontend > code/headers for palloc et al, particularly so that programs that want > to mix both can be easily compiled; see > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20130118150629.gc29...@ala