Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-11-03 14:39:45 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
>>> ISTM this specific case we could solve the issue by opening plruby.so /
>>> extension sos with RTLD_DEEPBIND. That doesn't work if ruby extensions
>>> that are loaded later use rb_iterate, but should work for the case above.
>> Doesn't work on non-glibc platforms, though.
> Yea, but I'm not sure there's anything portable to do about such cases :/
The portable answer is to rename to avoid the symbol conflict.
>>> I don't mind the precedent that much, but isn't that also not unlikely
>>> to break other extensions that use those functions?
>> I rather doubt there are any. Also, if there are, the RTLD_DEEPBIND
>> solution would break them too, no?
> Why would it break? Deepbind just means the to-be-opened .so is put
> first in the search path, if there's no match it'll still look in other
> sos.
Yeah, but once plruby is loaded, any subsequently loaded .so has
got two possible ways to resolve rb_iterate. No matter what we do,
the behavior will be wrong for some of them.
regards, tom lane
