On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 19:03:43 -0500
Andres Freund wrote:
> If llvmjit.so isn't available, jit is silently disabled.
Thanks - this is exactly the bit I wasn't sure about. The reason I came
to the hackers list is because I thought this wasn't the case. Normally
I don't delete arbitrary files after
Hi,
On 2025-01-11 13:22:39 -0800, Jeremy Schneider wrote:
> It's a cleaner solution if JIT works more like an extension, and we can
> run a single build and split JIT into a separate package.
It does work like that. Only llvmjit.so has the llvm dependency, the main
postgres binary doesn't link to
## Jeremy Schneider (schnei...@ardentperf.com):
> I'm running Postgres in containers, and recently did some analysis of
> the total container sizes. I posted some analysis over on the debian
> packaging mailing list [1] [2]. The TLDR is that LLVM alone makes up
> 33% of a postgres container's byte
On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 16:14:19 -0500
Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeremy Schneider writes:
> > Given the large number of bytes that LLVM pulls into a postgres
> > build, I think it would be a good idea to have the ability to split
> > it into a separate [recommended, but optional] package.
>
> Build witho
Jeremy Schneider writes:
> Given the large number of bytes that LLVM pulls into a postgres build,
> I think it would be a good idea to have the ability to split it into a
> separate [recommended, but optional] package.
Build without --with-llvm. Alternatively, split lib/llvmjit.so and
lib/bitcod
On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 12:56:19 -0800
Jeremy Schneider wrote:
> I'm running Postgres in containers, and recently did some analysis of
> the total container sizes. I posted some analysis over on the debian
> packaging mailing list [1] [2]. The TLDR is that LLVM alone makes up
> 33% of a postgres cont
