Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr wrote:
> >In the meantime would'nt it be nice to try to understand what happens and
> >correct it?
> >I'm a bit afraid that 8.1 is not used on unixware because people don't
> >have/want the patch installed.
> All the evidence is that this is a compiler bug. The apparent workaround
> for now would be to compile with optimisation turned off. Or use another
> compiler - gcc is available isn't it?
The SCO compiler was a buggy mess with any optimization turned on 10
years ago, and it still is. I see no reason our community should waste
time helping fix such a buggy compiler. If it was buggy for the past 10
years, I think it will be buggy for the next 10 too. We should just
turn off optimization for that compiler.
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Larry Rosenman||Date: 2005-07-27 13:57:12|
|Subject: Re: regression failure on latest CVS|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-07-27 13:38:52|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] O_DIRECT for WAL writes|