Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add port/strnlen support to libpq and ecpg Makefiles.

I wrote: > On reflection, let's just go with the solution of building libpgport_lib.a > with the right flags (fPIC + threading) and leave libpgport.a alone. > That way we don't need a debate about whether there's an efficiency > cost worth worrying about. I looked into this and got discouraged

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add port/strnlen support to libpq and ecpg Makefiles.

Andres Freund writes: > On 2017-10-11 11:58:58 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I agree the PITA factor of the current approach keeps increasing. >> It sounds a bit silly to build libpgport three ways, but maybe >> we should just do that. > We already kinda are, just by copying