Re: Optionally using a better backtrace library?

From: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Optionally using a better backtrace library?
Date: 2023-07-03 10:24:36
Message-ID: 2f891d7c-ad2b-b3b6-fe6b-6148d442b3a0@pgmasters.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 7/3/23 11:58, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> Nice things about libbacktrace are that the generation of stack traces is
>> documented to be async signal safe on most platforms (with a #define to figure
>> that out, and a more minimal safe version always available) and that it
>> supports a wide range of platforms:
>
> Sadly, it looks like the library is seldom distributed. For example,
> Debian seems to only have a package called android-libbacktrace which I
> imagine is not what we want. On my system I see a static library only
> -- is that enough? That file is part of package libgcc-10-dev, which
> tells me that we can't depend on that for packaging purposes.

It would be a pretty big win even if the improved backtrace is only
available in dev environments -- this is what pgBackRest currently does.

We are also considering adding this library to production builds but
have not pulled the trigger on that yet since we are a bit worried about
possible performance impact and have not had time to benchmark.

Regards,
-David

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2023-07-03 10:26:44 Re: Commitfest manager for July
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2023-07-03 10:17:10 Re: Consider \v to the list of whitespace characters in the parser