Tom Lane wrote: > Lee Kindness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane writes: > >>> Okay, so it seems -D_REENTRANT is the appropriate fix. > > > However, _REENTRANT is not a Solarisism... On all (recent) UNIX > > systems it toggles on correct handling for thread specific instances > > of historically global variables (eg errno). It should be considered > > for all platforms if libpq is intended to be used from threaded > > programs. > > Now that I think about it, what that macro is probably really doing is > switching the code from looking at a static "errno" variable to looking > at a per-thread variable. So in fact -D_REENTRANT would be correct if > you intended to link with a thread-aware libc, and wrong if you intended > to link with a non-aware libc. (Is there such a thing as a non-threaded > implementation of libc on the platforms where -D_REENTRANT does > anything?) If this analysis is right then I think we should *not* > force _REENTRANT; it will have to be up to users to choose the mechanism > they want to use in their programs.
As far as I remember, on some platforms -lpthread does replace some of the libc functions with thread-safe ones. That could be quite confusing. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
