Re: Relation bulk write facility
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
From: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Date: 2024-02-25T19:43:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Relax fsyncing at end of a bulk load that was not WAL-logged
- 68f199cea3b1 17.0 landed
- 077ad4bd76b1 18.0 landed
-
Fix cross-version upgrade tests after f0827b443.
- e8aecc5c2ce1 17.0 landed
-
Remove AIX support
- 0b16bb8776bb 17.0 landed
-
Fix compiler warning on typedef redeclaration
- d360e3cc60e3 17.0 landed
-
Introduce a new smgr bulk loading facility.
- 8af256524893 17.0 landed
Attachments
- align.c (text/plain)
On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 04:34:47PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > I agree with Andres though, that unless someone raises their hand and > volunteers to properly maintain the AIX support, we should drop it. There's no way forward in which AIX support stops doing net harm. Even if AIX enthusiasts intercepted would-be buildfarm failures and fixed them before buildfarm.postgresql.org could see them, the damage from the broader community seeing the AIX-specific code would outweigh the benefits of AIX support. I've now disabled the animals for v17+, though each may do one more run before picking up the disable. My upthread observation about xcoff section alignment was a red herring. gcc populates symbol-level alignment, and section-level alignment is unnecessary if symbol-level alignment is correct. The simplest workaround for $SUBJECT AIX failure would be to remove the "const", based on the results of the attached test program. The pg_prewarm.c var is like al4096_static in the outputs below, hence the lack of trouble there. The bulk_write.c var is like al4096_static_const_initialized. ==== gcc 8.3.0 al4096 4096 @ 0x11000c000 (mod 0) al4096_initialized 4096 @ 0x110000fd0 (mod 4048 - BUG) al4096_const 4096 @ 0x11000f000 (mod 0) al4096_const_initialized 4096 @ 0x10000cd00 (mod 3328 - BUG) al4096_static 4096 @ 0x110005000 (mod 0) al4096_static_initialized 4096 @ 0x110008000 (mod 0) al4096_static_const 4096 @ 0x100000c10 (mod 3088 - BUG) al4096_static_const_initialized 4096 @ 0x100003c10 (mod 3088 - BUG) ==== xlc 12.01.0000.0000 al4096 4096 @ 0x110008000 (mod 0) al4096_initialized 4096 @ 0x110004000 (mod 0) al4096_const 4096 @ 0x11000b000 (mod 0) al4096_const_initialized 4096 @ 0x100007000 (mod 0) al4096_static 4096 @ 0x11000e000 (mod 0) al4096_static_initialized 4096 @ 0x110001000 (mod 0) al4096_static_const 4096 @ 0x110011000 (mod 0) al4096_static_const_initialized 4096 @ 0x1000007d0 (mod 2000 - BUG) ==== ibm-clang 17.1.1.2 al4096 4096 @ 0x110001000 (mod 0) al4096_initialized 4096 @ 0x110004000 (mod 0) al4096_const 4096 @ 0x100001000 (mod 0) al4096_const_initialized 4096 @ 0x100005000 (mod 0) al4096_static 4096 @ 0x110008000 (mod 0) al4096_static_initialized 4096 @ 0x11000b000 (mod 0) al4096_static_const 4096 @ 0x100009000 (mod 0) al4096_static_const_initialized 4096 @ 0x10000d000 (mod 0)