| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |
| Date: | 2022-07-23 23:11:12 |
| Message-ID: | 1241567.1658617872@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Some of these depend on SUSv2 options (not just "base"), but we
> already do that (fsync, ...) and they're all features that are by now
> ubiquitous, which means the fallback code is untested and the probes
> are pointless.
Reading this, it occurred to me that it'd be interesting to scrape
all of the latest configure results from the buildfarm, and see which
tests actually produce more than one answer among the set of tested
platforms. Those that don't could be targets for further simplification,
or else an indicator that we'd better go find some more animals.
Before I go off and do that, though, I wonder if you already did.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2022-07-23 23:24:26 | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2022-07-23 22:39:27 | Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage |