Re: PG Extensions: Must be statically linked?

From: Mark Dilger <pgsql(at)markdilger(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: PG Extensions: Must be statically linked?
Date: 2006-03-03 18:26:21
Message-ID: 44088A4D.1060104@markdilger.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> My concern about how nicely libstdc++ will play in the backend
> environment still stands though.

I have had the same concern, though never any hard evidence of a problem. If
the C++ functions are wrapped with "extern C", and all exceptions caught
(perhaps converted into error numbers which are then returned from the wrapper
functions to the plain-C calling functions), are there any remaining known
problems? I have often considered making a C++ allocator which wrapped palloc
and pfree, so that I could then use the STL within the backend...

Has anyone tried this?

mark

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-03-03 18:27:56 Re: ipcclean in 8.1 broken?
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2006-03-03 18:13:51 Re: Foreign keys for non-default datatypes