From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: enable-thread-safety defaults? |
Date: | 2009-11-21 07:29:05 |
Message-ID: | 9837222c0911202329h2f5d5a74w9e0e796f6176694@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/11/20 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>:
> On fre, 2009-11-20 at 08:39 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> 2009/11/20 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>:
>> > On fre, 2009-11-20 at 02:41 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> >> Is there any actual reason why we are building without thread safety
>> >> by default on most platforms?
>> >
>> > Consistent defaults on all platforms?
>>
>> So why do we have largefile enabled by default? And zlib? And readline?
>
> Let me be more verbose: I would assume that we want the configure
> defaults to be the same on all platforms. We fail by default, for
> example, if zlib and readline are not there, but you can turn them off
> explicitly. If we turn thread-safety on by default, we will/should fail
> if thread-safety is not supported, requiring the user to turn it off
> explicitly.
Yes, of course. Silently turning it off would be a really really bad idea.
> If enough platforms don't support thread-safety, this could
> become annoying.
Agreed.
> I don't have a good overview over how many platforms would be affected,
> and I could in general support changing the default, but I'm just laying
> down one possible constraint.
Well, the buildfarm would tell us that, no? :)
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Grzegorz Jaskiewicz | 2009-11-21 09:20:47 | Re: DEFAULT of domain ignored in plpgsql (8.4.1) |
Previous Message | Emmanuel Cecchet | 2009-11-21 03:59:46 | Re: Partitioning option for COPY |