On 17 Jun 2003 at 14:14, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Then maybe we should make a libpq and a libpq_r, etc.
>
> That would be fine with me ... although it's only worth doing if the
> platform has a libc and a libc_r. Shall we use the existence of libc_r
> to drive this choice?
I agree with this. If libpq is linked against libc_r for threading and mutex
functions etc. and postgresql is linked against libc, then things like dblink
which uses both postgresql and libc run into problem of symbol conflict. I
experienced this on freeBSD and work around was to switch to linuxthreads which
is not really good.
If there are two versions of libraries available, we should do both. But that
adds to bloat for certain.
Just a thought.
Bye
Shridhar
--
Lie, n.: A very poor substitute for the truth, but the only one discovered to
date.
