From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Haroon (dot)" <contact(dot)mharoon(at)gmail(dot)com>, Haroon <muhammad(dot)haroon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Umair Shahid <umair(dot)shahid(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: initdb issue on 64-bit Windows - (Was: [pgsql-packagers] PG 9.6beta2 tarballs are ready) |
Date: | 2016-07-01 01:02:25 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQCv24xbD-Fq8pj_R9WdfN=xHHys5KU7sNV7=TgV6NqrQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Craig Ringer wrote:
>> On 30 June 2016 at 20:19, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hmm, so what about a pure 32bit build, if such a thing still exists? If
>> > so and it causes the same crash, perhaps we should have one member for
>> > each VS version running on 32bit x86.
>>
>> It's fine for a pure 32-bit build, i.e. 32-bit tools and 32-bit target. I
>> tested that.
>
> Ah, okay. I doubt it's worth setting up buildfarm members testing all
> cross-compiles just to try and catch possible compiler bugs that way, so
> unless somebody wants to invest more effort in this area, it seems we're
> done here.
Sure. To be honest just using the latest version of MSVC available for
the builds is fine I think. Windows is very careful regarding
backward-compatibility of its compiled stuff usually, even if by using
VS2015 you make the builds of Postgres incompatible with XP. But
software is a world that keeps moving on, and XP is already out of
support by Redmond.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-07-01 01:14:15 | Re: _mdfd_getseg can be expensive |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-07-01 00:58:08 | Re: Is a UDF binary portable across different minor releases and PostgreSQL distributions? |