| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Manabu Ori <manabu(dot)ori(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: spinlocks on powerpc |
| Date: | 2011-12-30 16:26:42 |
| Message-ID: | 1325262402.11282.3.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On fre, 2011-12-30 at 14:47 +0900, Manabu Ori wrote:
> If we can decide whether to use the hint operand when we build
> postgres, I think it's better to check if we can compile and run
> a sample code with lwarx hint operand than to refer to some
> arbitrary defines, such as FOO_PPC64 or something.
>
But you can't be sure that the host you are running this on has the same
capability as the build system. Packaging systems only classify
architectures on broad categories such as "i386" or "powerpc" or maybe
"powerpc64". So a package built for "powerpc64" has to run on all
powerpc64 hosts.
Imagine you are using some Pentium instruction and run the program on a
80486. It's the same architecture as far as kernel, package management,
etc. are concerned, but your program will break.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-12-30 16:43:05 | Re: spinlocks on powerpc |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-12-30 16:23:14 | Re: spinlocks on powerpc |