Re: Question regarding dynamic_library_path

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Thomas Hallgren" <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Question regarding dynamic_library_path
Date: 2004-06-08 14:37:13
Message-ID: 1366.1086705433@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Thomas Hallgren" <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com> writes:
> Why does postgres maintain a loader logic of its own? I can understand that
> the dynamic_library_path is necessary in order to configure everything in
> one single place. But why not just merge it with the LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or
> PATH on Windows) and then let dlopen do the rest using a stripped filename?

What LD_LIBRARY_PATH? The above statement is so full of system-specific
assumptions that it seems hopeless.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2004-06-08 14:37:55 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Failures with windows port
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-06-08 14:32:29 Re: Question regarding dynamic_library_path