Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 782438.1711062167@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded
Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded Re: Regression tests fail with musl libc because libpq.so can't be loaded |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > Just a thought: if we want to go this way, do we need a new exec call? > We already control the initial exec in pg_ctl.c. I'm resistant to assuming the postmaster is launched through pg_ctl. systemd, for example, might well prefer not to do that, not to mention all the troglodytes still using 1990s launch scripts. A question that seems worth debating in this thread is how much updating the process title is even worth nowadays. It feels like a hangover from before we had pg_stat_activity and other monitoring support. So I don't feel a huge need to support it on musl. The previously-suggested patch to whitelist glibc and variants, and otherwise fall back to PS_USE_NONE, seems like it might be the appropriate amount of effort. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: