| From: | Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals? |
| Date: | 2014-05-09 20:39:25 |
| Message-ID: | 536D3CFD.8000800@fuzzy.cz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9.5.2014 17:18, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>> So, if I get this right, the proposal is to have 7 animals:
>
> It's your machine, so you decide what you want. I'm only throwing
> out some ideas.
>
>> 1) all branches/locales, frequent builds (every few hours) magpie
>> - gcc fulmar - icc treepie - clang
>>
>> 2) single branch/locale, CLOBBER, built once a week magpie2 - gcc
>> fulmar2 - icc treepie - clang
>>
>> 3) single branch/locale, recursive CLOBBER, built once a month
>
> Check. Not those "2" names though.
Sure. That was just for illustration purposes.
>> I don't particularly mind the number of animals, although I was
>> shooting for lower number.
>
> Consider that if the recursive clobber fails, we don't want that
> failure to appear "diluted" among many successes of runs using the
> same animal with non-recursive clobber.
>
>> The only question is - should we use 3 animals for the recursive
>> CLOBBER too? I mean, one for each compiler?
>
> I guess it depends how likely we think that a different compiler
> will change the behavior of the shared invalidation queue. Somebody
> else would have to answer that. If not, then clearly we need only 5
> animals.
Well, I think you're forgetting CLOBBER_FREED_MEMORY - that's not just
about the invalidation queue. And I think we've been bitten by compilers
optimizing out parts of the code before (e.g. because we relied on
undefined behaviour).
regards
Tomas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2014-05-09 20:43:30 | Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-09 20:37:49 | Re: pg_class.relpages/allvisible probably shouldn't be a int4 |