| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX |
| Date: | 2018-01-23 14:52:39 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ6n1zGe-yV1yL5FsaVvRwYdGRcPEVRCGe94sghBmULwA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> If nobody is willing to put in the effort to keep AIX supported under
>> XLC, then we should just update the documentation to say that it isn't
>> supported. Our support for that platform is pretty marginal anyway if
>> we're only supporting it up through 6.1; that was released in 2007 and
>> went out of support in Q2 of last year.
>
> Huh? We have somebody just upthread saying that they're working out
> issues on newer AIX. We should at least give them time to finish
> that research before making any decisions.
Well, I certainly have no problem with that in theory. That's why my
sentence started with the word "if".
On a practical level, this thread has been dead for almost a year, and
has revived slightly because Michael bumped it, but nobody has really
made a firm commitment to do any specific thing to move this issue
forward. I'm happy if they do, but it might not happen.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikhil Sontakke | 2018-01-23 15:01:21 | Re: Logical Decoding and HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum assumptions |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2018-01-23 14:50:40 | Re: [HACKERS] PoC plpgsql - possibility to force custom or generic plan |