Re: HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 17964.1582908905@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed? (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: HAVE_WORKING_LINK still needed?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> I came across the HAVE_WORKING_LINK define in pg_config_manual.h.
> AFAICT, hard links are supported on Windows and Cygwin in the OS
> versions that we support, and pg_upgrade already contains the required
> shim. It seems to me we could normalize and simplify that, as in the
> attached patches. (Perhaps rename durable_link_or_rename() then.) I
> successfully tested on MSVC, MinGW, and Cygwin.
I don't have any way to test on Windows, but this patchset passes
eyeball review. +1 for getting rid of the special cases.
Also +1 for s/durable_link_or_rename/durable_link/.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: