Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob8We1gMW6mA-AKtc_Mx1LAGx9+aHOjmBEu_PYGDSpZkg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows  (Sandeep Thakkar <sandeep.thakkar@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] pl/perl extension fails on Windows
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Sandeep Thakkar
<sandeep.thakkar@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> I copied and pasted that portion of the build log into file build.log
> (attached) for Windows 32bit and Windows 64bit.

Can you also share the output of 'perl -V' on each system?

Comparing the 32-bit log and the 64-bit log, I see the following differences:

32-bit has extra options /IC:\pgBuild32\uuid\include /Oy- /analyze- /D
_USE_32BIT_TIME_T
64-bit has extra options /D WIN64 /D CONSERVATIVE /D USE_SITECUSTOMIZE
Both builds have several copies of /IC:\pgBuild32\include or
/IC:\pgBuild64\include, but the 64-bit build has an extra one

(I wrote that command on Linux, might need different quoting to work
on Windows.)

I'm suspicious about _USE_32BIT_TIME_T.  The contents of a
PerlInterpreter are defined in Perl's intrpvar.h, and one of those
lines is:

PERLVAR(I, basetime,    Time_t)         /* $^T */

Now, Time_t is defined as time_t elsewhere in the Perl headers, so if
the plperl build and the Perl interpreter build had different ideas
about whether that flag was set, the interpreter sizes would be
different.  Unfortunately for this theory, if I'm interpreting the
screenshot you posted correctly, the sizes are different by exactly 16
bytes, and I can't see how a difference in the size of time_t could
account for more than 8 bytes (4 bytes of actual size change + 4 bytes
of padding).

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] More fun with container types
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] dubious error message from partition.c