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
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 (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: