Re: [PATCH] Add native windows on arm64 support

Hi,

Just a follow-up: having spoken to the relevant people, sadly, right now,
we do not have the capacity to be pulling machines out of our day-to-day CI
tasks to dedicate to specific projects.

I can, however, offer a few alternatives:

1. If you have capacity on your linux x64 machines, it is possible to
emulate WoA, and run tests that way:
https://www.linaro.org/blog/emulate-windows-on-arm/
This is something that works well for projects that we have contributed it
to (ie, sse2neon uses it via github actions) - if you run into any issues
with this, we are able to try and fix them on our side, as likely more than
postgres would benefit.

2. If there is any scope for it on your side at all, a Samsung Galaxy Book
Go 14" can be had from ebay for ~£140.
Understandably, this might not be an option for you.

If it helps, if this is merged, we do have the possibility of running our
own downstream CI builds nightly for the tip of your main branch here:
https://gitlab.com/Linaro/windowsonarm/nightly
This is something we do for a few projects that do not have full upstream
CI.

Thanks,
Anthony

On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 at 11:34, Anthony Roberts <anthony(dot)roberts(at)linaro(dot)org>
wrote:

> Thanks for the link - that looks basically the same as what we do for
> CMake (option 2), so should be relatively easy.
>
> I will have a chat to relevant people about setting a machine up
> properly for it.
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony
>
> On 25/08/2023 11:17, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:40:39AM +0100, Anthony Roberts wrote:
> >> Which of these are you looking for us to provide:
> >>
> >> * A machine for you to directly access (via a VPN)
> >> * A machine we just run a worker script on that automatically picks up
> the
> >> builds as required
> >> * Us to do downstream CI
> >>
> >> All are possible, but preferably not option 1, as it would mean
> straight up
> >> pulling out a machine from our build farm, and it has to go through all
> >> sorts of approvals internally. If it's the only way forward I can kick
> it up
> >> the chain though.
> >>
> >> Option 2 and 3 are ones we do for various other projects (ie. 2 -
> CMake, 3 -
> >> OpenSSL)
> > The community has its own CI facility. Here is a link of how to set
> > up a machine:
> > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto
> >
> > And all the results are published by the maintainers of the machines
> > on a periodic basis where the buildfarm client code is set:
> > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_status.pl
> >
> > The final result would be for you to maintain the machine so as we are
> > able to see if anything breaks with it. Adding extra dependencies to
> > the build like OpenSSL would be nice, but based on the contents of the
> > patch to add this port that does not seem mandatory to me, either.
> >
> > Once the machine is ready, you will need to request a buildfarm
> > machine name and a key to be able to begin publishing the reports of
> > the builds to the community buildfarm. Once the machine is ready to
> > go, just let me know and I'd be OK to merge the patch (I still want to
> > do a final review of it in case I've missed something, but I can move
> > on with that before the buildfarm machine is set up).
> > --
> > Michael
>