-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 01/13/2014 11:13 AM, Joe Conway wrote:
> Yes, that's more-or-less how I do it. I checked with EDB to be sure
> I had the same SDK (looks like last time I did it it was SDK 7.1),
> then I:
> 1) download postgres source 2) copy plr source into contrib
What I mean is that you should not need a full Pg build tree to
compile extensions. Just as we use PGXS on *nix, so it is possible to
just use Visual Studio to build the extension on Windows as a VS
project like any other.
> As long as the SDK is matched, the resulting plr.dll works fine
> with the EDB one-click installer version of postgres (or at least
> so far).
The SDK shouldn't even need to match. Windows software is expected to
cope with mismatched, mix-and-match C runtimes. Icky, but occasionally
So long as you don't pass a FILE* across DLL boundaries, or free()
memory that was malloc()'d in another DLL, mixing runtimes should work
fine. I'd be interested in knowing what problems you encountered when
the runtime didn't match.
Maybe it's specific to how we do build within a Pg source tree? I was
able to use three different SDK builds against EDB's latest 9.3
packages - SDK 7.1 (x86 and x64), toolchain v90 (x86), and toolchain
v100 (x86) - to compile and test a moderately trivial extension.
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: