From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Benjamin Leff <benjamin(dot)w(dot)leff(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Client-only Meson Build From Sources |
Date: | 2025-10-22 09:02:01 |
Message-ID: | ljlpkiao7pg7h36nql5ki7qb5cnvm34a2gnlfjp3kto2gbrbxl@kfqnxxbmr4vl |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2025-10-21 12:02:27 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Benjamin Leff <benjamin(dot)w(dot)leff(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> >> I believe the prevailing opinion was that the amount
> >> of time saved by not building all of PG didn't justify the maintenance
> >> effort to keep the build scripts working for that case
>
> > IMO, it’s not just about time. For bare bones package managers when there’s
> > no need to build the server, this saves a few GB.
>
> It's still fundamentally about trading off machine resources versus
> people time, though, and that tradeoff is not getting more attractive.
The impact really depends on what we define a client-only build as.
It'd not be hard at all to add a meta target that just builds a subset of the
tree. It'd be slightly harder, but still not that hard, to add a target to
install just a subset of libraries / binaries.
What would be a bit harder would be to add a configure-time switch to only
build client binaries. Mainly because, I think, it'd increase the test matrix
more than a dedicated build target would.
Benjamin, what precisely are you looking for with a client-only build?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | shveta malik | 2025-10-22 09:10:33 | Re: POC: enable logical decoding when wal_level = 'replica' without a server restart |
Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2025-10-22 08:59:35 | Re: libpq OpenSSL and multithreading |