Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: beta 1 failed on linux mipsel

From: "Jim Buttafuoco" <jim(at)contactbda(dot)com>
To: "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: beta 1 failed on linux mipsel
Date: 2004-08-30 17:13:27
Message-ID: 20040830171130.M90360@contactbda.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom,

I have confirmed that 7.4.3 works on the cobalt raq mipsel system.  I have not looked at the s_lock.[ch] code as I 
have not coded in C for years and don't know the backend code very well.  Do you have any ideas?

Jim

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: jim(at)contactbda(dot)com
Cc: "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:42:57 -0400
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] beta 1 failed on linux mipsel 

> "Jim Buttafuoco" <jim(at)contactbda(dot)com> writes:
> > Shouldn't this also work on mipsel CPU's?
> 
> It should work on a real MIPS CPU.  The PlayStation 2 has a dumbed-down
> MIPS chip without the TAS instruction :-(, but now that we've eliminated
> that point I think you've found a problem.  We made several
> reorganizations in the spinlock code between 7.4 and 8.0 that could
> possibly have broken the platforms we were not testing on --- can you
> take a look at the changes in s_lock.h and s_lock.c and see where we
> went wrong?
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
>       joining column's datatypes do not match
------- End of Original Message -------


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-08-30 17:23:03
Subject: Re: beta 1 failed on linux mipsel
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2004-08-30 16:45:13
Subject: Re: psql questions: SQL, progname, copyright dates

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group