From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: AIX support - alignment issues |
Date: | 2022-07-02 19:42:05 |
Message-ID: | 20220702194205.nhit4wcm5mrgaxg3@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-07-02 11:54:16 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I tend to agree about dropping AIX. But I wonder if there is an
> argument against that proposal that doesn't rely on AIX being relevant
> to at least one user. Has supporting AIX ever led to the discovery of
> a bug that didn't just affect AIX?
Yes, it clearly has. But I tend to think that that's far outweighed by the
complications triggered by AIX support. It'd be a different story if AIX
hadn't a very peculiar linking model and was more widely accessible.
> What is the best argument *against* desupporting AIX that you know of?
Hm.
- a distinct set of system libraries that can help find portability issues
- With IBM's compiler it adds a, not otherwise used, compiler that PG builds
with. So the warnings could theoretically help find issues that we wouldn't
otherwise see - but I don't think that's been particularly useful (nor
monitored). And the compiler is buggy enough to add a fair bit work over the
years.
> Desupporting AIX doesn't mean that any AIX users will be left in the
> lurch immediately. Obviously these users will be able to use a
> supported version of Postgres for several more years.
Right.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dian M Fay | 2022-07-02 19:42:28 | Re: doc: Make selectivity example match wording |
Previous Message | Steve Chavez | 2022-07-02 19:38:41 | Re: Add red-black tree missing comparison searches |