Re: [HACKERS] Re : Solaris Performance - Profiling (Solved)

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 10:23:41AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:

> > How about we include this and have configure somehow ensure the Solaris
> > users get it automatically?
>
> Hmm. I suppose there'd be no license issues with borrowing a BSD qsort.
> But I can't see any reasonable way for configure to decide automatically
> whether we should replace the system qsort. I think we'd have to put
> a USE_PRIVATE_QSORT symbol definition into src/template/solaris.
>
> Can anyone see a problem with doing it that way --- are there any
> versions of Solaris where this'd be a bad idea?

Would it be possible instead to make it a --configure option, or just
to add a note to the Solaris FAQ about adding an option to CFLAGS?
I'd be leery of automatically replacing system libraries, if only
because it might surprise people. Clearly the improvement is a win
in this case, but if Sun fixes their library, it might be yet faster.

(By the way, I've been following this thread, and noticed that the
problem shows up with gcc 2.95; AFAIK, 2.95 couldn't generate 64 bit
Solaris binaries, so we can be fairly certain the problem is in the
32 bit library. Maybe the 64 bit one is better? I _may_ have time
to check this week, but it's looking unlikely. If no-one else does,
I'll try it out as soon as I can.)

A

--
----
Andrew Sullivan 87 Mowat Avenue
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M6K 3E3
+1 416 646 3304 x110