Re: -fPIC

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: -fPIC
Date: 2005-09-11 16:33:00
Message-ID: 5296.1126456380@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> So far, we have tended to use -fpic to compile position-independent code
> until we have received some sort of overflow that forced the use of
> -fPIC. Since 8.0, the makefiles to build shared libraries are also
> available to external modules through the pgxs system, so we cannot
> exactly check anymore what the fpic vs. fPIC requirement of each
> conceivable module is. I have just received confirmation that PL/Java
> needs -fPIC to compile on Alpha and S/390 on Linux, so we need to make
> at least that change, but maybe it's more prudent to change to -fPIC
> across the board now. Comments?

PL/Java is bigger than the whole backend?

The reason for -fpic vs -fPIC (on the machines where it makes any
difference at all) is that the former is faster. I'm not real thrilled
by the prospect that a bloated add-on should get to dictate an
across-the-board slowdown even on installations where it will never
be used.

I think the correct answer is for PL/Java to do s/-fpic/-fPIC/ on
CFLAGS in its Makefile, rather than trying to force the same on
everything else.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • -fPIC at 2005-09-11 15:49:40 from Peter Eisentraut

Responses

  • Re: -fPIC at 2005-09-11 17:11:18 from Peter Eisentraut

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hans-Jürgen Schönig 2005-09-11 16:41:36 Re: random system table corruption ...
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-09-11 16:24:39 Re: random system table corruption ...