Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch - Debug builds without optimization

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch - Debug builds without optimization
Date: 2011-11-30 03:35:34
Message-ID: 201111300335.pAU3ZYd24491@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Yes. ?-O0 is really a pretty horrid default choice, and we should NOT be
> >> recommending it, especially not with no discussion of the disadvantages.
> >
> > I have applied the attached patch to mention the debugger. ?OK?
> 
> Not really.  That's still too much encouragement.  I think you should
> just take that part out altogether.
> 
> Discussing changes before committing them might be a good idea, too.

Well, the original patch got no replies, so I figured it was OK.

I modified the docs to just mention that a debugger might need special
flags.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

Attachment: /rtmp/debug
Description: text/x-diff (980 bytes)

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-11-30 03:55:06
Subject: Re: autovacuum and default_transaction_isolation
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-11-30 03:12:13
Subject: Re: DOMAINs and CASTs

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group