On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 1:14 AM Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > If the patch had just made postgres.h include varatt.h, like it does elog.h, > I'd consider that change a nonnegative. Grouping things is nice, even if it > makes compilation a bit slower. That also covers your frontend use case. How > about that?
I'm not direly opposed to that, but I'm also unconvinced that having the varatt.h stuff is important enough relative to other things to justify giving it a privileged place forever. > I agree fixing any one extension is easy enough. Thinking back to the > htup_details.h refactor, I found the aggregate pain unreasonable relative to > alleged benefits, even though each individual extension wasn't too bad. > SET_VARSIZE is used more (74 pgxn distributions) than htup_details.h (62). What annoyed me about that refactoring is that, in most cases where I had been including htup.h, I had to change it to include htup_details.h. In the main source tree, too, we've got 31 places that include access/htup.h and 241 that include access/htup_details.h. It's hard to argue that it was worth splitting the file given those numbers, and in fact I think that change was a mistake. But that doesn't mean every such change is a mistake. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
