Hi, On 2017-10-11 11:58:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > Phew. This is a bit a sad state of affairs. The separate libpq logic for > > getting pgport is presumably because of possibly different threading > > flags and then because of the appropriate compiler/linker flags for a > > shared library? > > I don't see why threading would matter, but building with -fPIC or > not is definitely an issue.
-pthread changes some "memory model" type assumptions by the compiler too IIRC, not just linker stage things. In a non-threaded environment the compiler is kinda free to invent phantom stores and such. It's unlikely to matter for just pgbench, but ... > 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 ;) > 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. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers