Re: Call for platforms (HP-UX)

From: Giles Lean <giles(at)nemeton(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Call for platforms (HP-UX)
Date: 2001-04-07 05:24:05
Message-ID: 18576.986621045@nemeton.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> Okay, here are my results:
>
> Box 1: C180 (2.0 PA8000), HPUX 10.20
>
> Compile with gcc: all tests pass
> Compile with cc: two lines of diffs in geometry (attached)
>
> Box 2: 715/75 (1.1 PA7100LC), HPUX 10.20
>
> Compile with gcc: all tests pass
> Compile with cc: all tests pass

I haven't had time to look at this further yet, except to build 7.1RC3
a couple of times with the HP ANSI C compiler today:

PA-RISC 1.1 code (-Ae +O2 +DAportable): all tests pass
PA-RISC 2.0 code (-Ae +O2 +DA2.0 +DS2.0): geometry failures

I'm not sure how interesting these differences are anymore -- is there
anyone familiar enough with floating point to determine if the results
are acceptable (although currently unexpected :-) or not?

Regards,

Giles

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-04-07 05:32:15 Re: Call for platforms (HP-UX)
Previous Message Giles Lean 2001-04-07 04:43:39 Re: Call for platforms