On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> 2. Seeing that this is the first complaint since 9.0, should we decide
> that --disable-shared is no longer worth supporting? Seems like we
> should either make this case work or remove this switch. I notice
> that the switch isn't documented anywhere in the SGML docs, either.
> If we do keep it, we'd better document that it results in a severely
> crippled version of Postgres.
I can't really imagine the reasons to support this switch at this
time. Compile times are fast, disk space cheap, and if one wanted to
avoid the dynamic linker entirely and use features like replication
(which, IIRC, is dynamically linked for libpqwalreceiver.so) and
plpgsql then people are out of luck without some work of (perhaps?)
questionable value.
--
fdr