Re: postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc
Date: 2016-02-15 23:07:48
Message-ID: 13616.1455577668@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> I configured a copy of animal "mandrill" that way and launched a test run.
> The postgres_fdw suite failed as attached. A manual "make -C contrib
> installcheck" fails the same way on a ppc64 GNU/Linux box, but it passes on
> x86_64 and aarch64. Since contrib test suites don't recognize TEMP_CONFIG,
> check-world passes everywhere.

Hm, is this with or without the ppc-related atomics fix you just found?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2016-02-15 23:12:03 Re: postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc
Previous Message Noah Misch 2016-02-15 22:52:31 postgres_fdw vs. force_parallel_mode on ppc