Re: openbsd, plpython, missing threading symbols

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: openbsd, plpython, missing threading symbols
Date: 2005-08-03 20:28:21
Message-ID: 42F128E5.3020705@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>
>>Did we recently make some fixes for FBSD that cured the problem with
>>unresolved pthread* symbols for plpython?
>>
>>
>
>No, it's not fixed. I think the owner of the freebsd buildfarm machine
>masked the problem by building an unthreaded libpython.
>
>The only fix that so far looks like it would work is to build the
>backend with threading (CPPFLAGS += -D_THREAD_SAFE and LIBS += -pthread,
>IIUC). This seems sufficiently invasive that I'm quite loath to do it.
>Does anyone have a handle on the likely performance and stability costs
>of doing this on BSDen?
>
>The alternative is to say that plpython isn't supported on BSDen unless
>you choose to build an unthreaded libpython. Unpleasant as that may be,
>I do not care for the proposition that plpython gets to dictate our
>choice of libc. Whatever costs are incurred by that will be paid by
>people who are not even using plpython, and that's not the direction
>I want to see the pain flowing in.
>
>
>
>

I'm OK with that, but if that's what's done I think we should check for
it up front at configure time and not let it fail at run time like we do
now.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matt Miller 2005-08-03 20:32:30 Re: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-08-03 20:25:30 Re: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT