| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: -fPIC |
| Date: | 2005-09-12 01:21:14 |
| Message-ID: | 87u0gr2i9h.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > The reason for -fpic vs -fPIC (on the machines where it makes any
> > difference at all) is that the former is faster.
>
> I don't doubt that, but out of curiosity, considering that everyone else
> is using libtool, and libtool always uses -fPIC, what kind of impact
> does this *really* have?
Incidentally, Debian uses -fPIC as a matter of policy everywhere too. I think
the problem is that it's hard to know in advance whether -fpic is going to
cause a problem and mixing -fpic and -fPIC libraries is a problem. So it's
safer to just compile all the libraries with -fPIC.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | huaxin zhang | 2005-09-12 02:20:52 | counting disk access from index seek operation -- how to? |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2005-09-12 01:15:55 | Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches |