| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeroen Ooms <jeroen(at)berkeley(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: building libpq.a static library |
| Date: | 2017-07-12 23:02:41 |
| Message-ID: | 20170712230241.6azsg5qwriifkszd@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-07-12 23:55:56 +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
> Fwiw I think the real problem is that building static libraries
> "properly" requires different compiler options -- notably they're not
> normally built with -fPIC. So that means building every object twice
> which kind of breaks make's build model which has a simple dependency
> graph where each object appears once. Some packages do this by
> inventing a foo-shared.o and foo-static.o but that introduces its own
> weirdness.
>
> I don't know what the downsides would be of creating a static library
> out of objects built with -fPIC. It might just be a small performance
> penalty which might be no big deal for libpq. That may be a good
> compromise.
FWIW, most linux distributions build everything with -fPIC/PIE anyway
these days, to allow address space randomization. So I don't think this
is a huge concern for modern platforms.
- Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dean Rasheed | 2017-07-13 00:32:52 | Re: New partitioning - some feedback |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2017-07-12 22:55:56 | Re: building libpq.a static library |