Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Montag, 18. Oktober 2004 19:43 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > An alternative possibility is to stop pretending that pgport is agnostic
> > about whether it is in backend or frontend. This might mean some
> > duplication of code between src/port/ and src/backend/port/, but if
> > that's what it takes to have sane error handling, that's what we should do.
>
> The original plan for libpgport was to be a repository of functions that
> replace missing operating system functionality, like libiberty. I would have
> have liked to be able to lift these functions into other projects without
> complications. That implies that these functions should certainly not care
> about anything that by definition goes on above the operating system level.
>
> Now the directory has grown into a sort of general repository of code that is
> shared between more than one part of the PostgreSQL source tree, without any
> regard for well-defined interfaces. If you need to do that, please put it
> elsewhere, where only the involved parts see it. Not now, but in the future.
So we will have a pgport and a pgshare? I don't see a huge value in
that. Ideally, yea, they are different concepts but practially it seems
like a waste to make the distinction.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073