| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Mikhail Matrosov <mikhail(dot)matrosov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, ewan_higgs(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)uk, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Configure with thread sanitizer fails the thread test |
| Date: | 2021-07-23 19:57:41 |
| Message-ID: | 20210723195741.7salyf66oqrc4rfb@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-07-23 13:42:41 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > ... that said, I wonder why would we do this in the thread_test program
> > rather than in configure itself. Wouldn't it make more sense for the
> > configure test to be skipped altogether (marking the result as
> > thread-safe) when running under thread sanitizer, if there's a way to
> > detect that?
>
> TBH, I wonder why we don't just nuke thread_test.c altogether.
> Is it still useful in 2021? Machines that still need
> --disable-thread-safety can doubtless be counted without running
> out of fingers, and I think their owners can be expected to know
> that they need that.
+1. And before long it might be time to remove support for systems
without threads...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-07-23 20:03:25 | Re: [Patch] ALTER SYSTEM READ ONLY |
| Previous Message | Ranier Vilela | 2021-07-23 19:20:37 | Re: Fix memory leak when output postgres_fdw's "Relations" |