| From: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Greg Stark" <greg(dot)stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Postgres <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: posix_fadvise v22 |
| Date: | 2009-01-02 05:12:50 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f070901012112s3994b32cy217054db133383ad@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Greg Stark <greg(dot)stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Sorry for top-posting -- phone mail client sucks.
>
> I thought the autoconf ac_run_check was the test that people were
> questioning. That calls posix_fadvise to see if it crashes at configure
> time.
Yes, that's what I removed.
> The guc run-time check is checking for known-buggy versions of glibc using
> sysconf to check what version of glibc you have.
Right - that check is still in my updated patch.
I think the confusion may stem from the fact that Tom and I used the
word "runtime" to refer to the ac_run_check thing, because it is
checking something about the runtime environment (namely, whether
posix_fadvise works or not) at configure-time.
In any event, it seems as though we are all on the same page.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2009-01-02 05:44:49 | Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4? |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2009-01-02 04:49:57 | Re: posix_fadvise v22 |