Re: PGDLLEXPORTing all GUCs?

Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 05/08/2014 12:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If Craig has a concrete argument why all GUCs should be accessible
>> to external modules, then let's see it

> As for just GUCs: I suggested GUCs because GUCs are what's been coming
> up repeatedly as an actual practical issue.

Meh.  A quick look through the commit logs says that GUC variables are not
more than 50% of what we've had to PGDLLIMPORT'ify in the past year or
two.  Maybe that's different from 2ndQuadrant's internal experience,
but then you've not showed us the use-case driving your changes.

> I'd be quite happy to
> PGDLLEXPORT all extern vars, but I was confident that'd be rejected for
> aesthetic reasons, and thought that exporting all GUCs would be a
> reasonable compromise.

From the aesthetic standpoint, what I'd like is to not have to blanket
our source code with Windows-isms.  But I guess I can't have that.
        regards, tom lane