gpdb
gpdb copied to clipboard
greenplum-db
Revert "Fix postgres_fdw's libpq issue (#10617)"
This reverts commit 667f0c37bc6d7bce7be8b758652ef95ddb823e19.
It would also work without it, in the opposite way, it has two issues:
1, it failed to build on macOS, with an error "ld: unknown option: --exclude-libs=libpq.a" 2, after the 12 merge, it triggers a PostgreSQL's error: "libpq is incorrectly linked to backend functions"
Fixes https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/issues/11400 and https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/issues/11523
BTW, checkout https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/pull/9462 if you have frontend/backend concern.
Hi @adam8157 , we will take over all the link and security issue of dblink, postgres_fdw and greenplum_fdw.We will find the best solution or trade off. simply reverting doesn't make any sense. it is meant to solve the link issue and it did work on some platforms. I don't think we should move on until know why. thanks for you work.
@adam8157 this PR has been sitting for many months... please can you work with the required stakeholders to drive closure for the PR and report on what's the plan for the same.
@adam8157 this PR has been sitting for many months... please can you work with the required stakeholders to drive closure for the PR and report on what's the plan for the same.
Sure, we had an offline meeting, and the conclusion is that this PR is not perfect, but we don't have a perfect one yet, and it doesn't work without a fix.
The owner team's load might be high, we will discuss. Thanks.
Do you wish to create a github issue then in-place to track the problem and close this PR if this is not intended solution?
Do you wish to create a github issue then in-place to track the problem and close this PR if this is not intended solution?
There is an issue https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/issues/11400, I wish to merge this PR, making it work is always the highest priority. Someone could make it perfect later.
Let me discuss and plan with the owner team first.
Closing this PR for now given no movement forward on it. Once concrete plan and path to move forward is know re-open the PR.
This previous PR https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/pull/3608/files has added a lot of FRONTEND macro in codes. I have checked most of them that I think we should remove these lines: https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/bbad4c972334b6d868da7f260a52e66a51cebb12/src/interfaces/libpq/libpq-fe.h#L226-L229. But there are some lines not quite sure about: https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/bbad4c972334b6d868da7f260a52e66a51cebb12/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-protocol3.c#L86-L90 https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/bbad4c972334b6d868da7f260a52e66a51cebb12/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-protocol3.c#L442-L542 https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/bbad4c972334b6d868da7f260a52e66a51cebb12/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-protocol3.c#L179-L190 https://github.com/greenplum-db/gpdb/blob/bbad4c972334b6d868da7f260a52e66a51cebb12/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c#L403-L420 If we revert the previous commit, then postgres_fdw will be compiled as backend. We should care about the ssl between QD and QE for gp2gp. If these all got checked without making postgres_fdw or greenplum_fdw missing anything. I think it is safe for use to move on this revert.
