"Zoltan Boszormenyi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Zoltan Boszormenyi írta: >> Gregory Stark írta: >>> 4) Your problems with tsearch and timestamp etc raise an interesting >>> problem. >>> We don't need to mark this in pg_control because it's a purely a run-time >>> issue and doesn't affect on-disk storage. However it does affect ABI >>> compatibility with modules. Perhaps it should be added to >>> PG_MODULE_MAGIC_DATA. >> >> I am looking into it. > > Do you think it's actually needed? > PG_MODULE_MAGIC_DATA contains the server version > the external module was compiled for. This patch won't go to > older versions, so it's already protected from the unconditional > float4 change. And because you can't mix server and libraries > with different bitsize, it's protected from the conditional int64, > float8, etc. changes.
Right, it does seem like we're conservative about adding things to PG_MODULE_MAGIC. As long as this is hard coded based on HAVE_LONG_INT_64 then we don't strictly need it. And I don't see much reason to make this something the user can override. If there are modules which use the wrong macros and assume certain other data types are pass-by-reference when they're not then they're going to fail regardless of what version of postgres they're compiled against anyways. So I would say in response to your other query to _not_ use pg_config_manual.h which is intended for variables which the user can override. If you put anything there then we would have to worry about incompatibilities. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support! -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
