| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Ronan Dunklau <ronan(dot)dunklau(at)aiven(dot)io>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: LLVM 16 (opaque pointers) |
| Date: | 2023-09-21 00:47:35 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGLdgmOGFUEefFGCaofPCsPj4WoCFJ-NpFTMjOFQnaog_w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 12:24 PM Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-09-21 at 08:22 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > So far I've tested LLVM versions 10, 15, 16, 17, 18 (= their main
> > branch) against PostgreSQL versions 14, 15, 16. I've attached the
> > versions that apply to master and 16, and pushed back-patches to 14
> > and 15 to public branches if anyone's interested[1]. Back-patching
> > further seems a bit harder. I'm quite willing to do it, but ... do we
> > actually need to, ie does anyone really *require* old PostgreSQL
> > release branches to work with new LLVM?
>
> RHEL releases new LLVM version along with their new minor releases every
> 6 month, and we have to build older versions with new LLVM each time.
> From RHEL point of view, it would be great if we can back-patch back to
> v12 :(
Got it. OK, I'll work on 12 and 13 now.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2023-09-21 01:06:58 | Re: Memory consumed by child SpecialJoinInfo in partitionwise join planning |
| Previous Message | Devrim Gündüz | 2023-09-21 00:27:38 | Re: Guiding principle for dropping LLVM versions? |