Re: 8.0 beta 1 on linux-mipsel R5900

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 8.0 beta 1 on linux-mipsel R5900
Date: 2004-08-24 05:36:52
Message-ID: 87eklx2j2j.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

> Chris <list(at)1006(dot)org> writes:
> > I've compiled 8.0 beta 1 on a R5900 V3.1 (a playstation 2) running
> > Linux (PS2 Linux 1) for portability testing.
> > ...
> > I'm wondering: would it be hard to fix the assembly spinlock code
> > for the R5900?
>
> According to the previous port report from Red Hat, the PS2 chip simply
> doesn't have any user-space TAS instruction, so you're pretty much stuck.
> If you can find something that works, let us know.

Out of curiosity. If it lacks a tas instruction, is there really any smp
implementation that runs on it? Why would postgres want spinlocks at all with
only one processor?

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-08-24 05:38:17 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Rearrange pg_subtrans handling
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2004-08-24 05:13:35 AT TIME ZONE