Re: Make Intel's ICX compiler working

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Make Intel's ICX compiler working
Date: 2026-03-11 18:19:03
Message-ID: e2xdm24z6rcnnjvtd6kcm2mhryootfpgogllbgvbmdkhe5p4jm@b72i6g2fnf2f
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2026-03-11 18:10:55 +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 11:08:01AM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I think that it makes sense to have ICX working (we took care of ICC in the past),
> > > so PFA, a patch implementing those changes for both autoconf and meson.
> >
> > -many without some very very very good reasons.
>
> The reasoning was that without the patch, one could still compile with ICX and
> get silent errors or worst segfault later on. The patch idea was to prevent
> those. That said, I agree that ICX looks buggy, so maybe we should just
> error out if we detect it's being used?

I don't think it's worth doing anything about random new compilers until
there's actually bogus reports coming in. If the compiler developers want to
test postgres with their new thing, what's the gain from making that harder?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2026-03-11 18:20:05 Re: Change initdb default to the builtin collation provider
Previous Message Bertrand Drouvot 2026-03-11 18:10:55 Re: Make Intel's ICX compiler working