opteron port [was: Re: Call for port reports]

From: Noèl Köthe <noel(at)debian(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: opteron port [was: Re: Call for port reports]
Date: 2003-10-30 14:41:21
Message-ID: 1067524881.1359.85.camel@localhost
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Am So, den 26.10.2003 schrieb Bruce Momjian um 02:38:

> > All 93 tests passed.
...
> > Linux pergolesi 2.4.22 #1 SMP Mon Aug 25 20:56:25 CEST 2003 i686 GNU/Linux
> >
> > It says i686 but its AMD Opteron:
> >
> > noel(at)pergolesi:~/pgsql$ cat /proc/cpuinfo |more
...
> > model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 240
...
> I am confused how to handle this. Is this running in 32-bit mode? I am
> inclined to mention Opteron only when tested in 64-bit mode, because I
> think we all assume a 32-bit Opteron is the same as a standard
> AMD/Intel. Does uname report differently in 64-bit mode.

You are right. Its now just like an i386 so it doesn't make sense to
list it. When I will get access to an 64bit Opteron system I will test
it again.

--
Noèl Köthe <noel debian.org>
Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2003-10-30 15:04:39 Re: Bug in Rule+Foreing key constrain?
Previous Message Larry Rosenman 2003-10-30 14:35:55 SCO released UP3 today... (fwd)