Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add port/strnlen support to libpq and ecpg Makefiles.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add port/strnlen support to libpq and ecpg Makefiles.
Date: 2017-10-11 16:32:20
Message-ID: 22846.1507739540@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2017-10-11 11:58:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I agree the PITA factor of the current approach keeps increasing.
>> It sounds a bit silly to build libpgport three ways, but maybe
>> we should just do that.

> We already kinda are, just by copying things around ;)

Yeah. I hadn't realized how much duplication of effort is happening
within ecpg. This was a somewhat reasonable solution when it was
first invented for libpq only, but building snprintf.o four times
is pretty silly.

>> Or conceivably we should just build the FE version of libpgport.a
>> with -fPIC and not worry about whether that loses some efficiency
>> for client programs. A lot of distros are effectively forcing
>> that, or even -fPIE, anyway.

> Hm.

On reflection, let's just go with the solution of building libpgport_lib.a
with the right flags (fPIC + threading) and leave libpgport.a alone.
That way we don't need a debate about whether there's an efficiency
cost worth worrying about.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-10-11 18:29:05 pgsql: Fix low-probability loss of NOTIFY messages due to XID wraparoun
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-10-11 16:12:18 Re: pgsql: Add port/strnlen support to libpq and ecpg Makefiles.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-10-11 16:38:09 Re: Slow synchronous logical replication
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-10-11 16:27:51 Re: Predicate Locks for writes?