| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andreas Seltenreich <andreas(dot)seltenreich(at)credativ(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <bernd(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.3.9 and pg_multixact corruption |
| Date: | 2015-09-28 18:34:29 |
| Message-ID: | 56098835.8050401@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/28/2015 08:10 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> -1 on that idea. I really don't think that we should categorically
> decide we don't support higher optimization levels. If the compiler
> has a bug, then the compiler manufacturer should fix it, and it's not
> our fault. If the compiler doesn't have a bug and our stuff is
> blowing up, then we have a bug and should fix it. I suppose there
> could be some grey area but hopefully not too much.
Or it's PILBChAK. I know Sun-CC used to warn that -O3 was unsuitable for
most programs because it could change behavior.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-09-28 18:37:58 | Re: 9.3.9 and pg_multixact corruption |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2015-09-28 18:29:38 | Re: COPY planning |