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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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