Horton

Re: Remove AIX Support (was: Re: Relation bulk write facility)

Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>

View thread
From: Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, 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: 2024-02-29T09:24:24Z
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 →

  1. Relax fsyncing at end of a bulk load that was not WAL-logged

  2. Fix cross-version upgrade tests after f0827b443.

  3. Remove AIX support

  4. Fix compiler warning on typedef redeclaration

  5. Introduce a new smgr bulk loading facility.

Hi,

On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 12:57:31AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2024-02-29 09:13:04 +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > The commit message says there is not a lot of user demand and that might
> > be right, but contrary to other fringe OSes that got removed like HPPA
> > or Irix, I believe Postgres on AIX is still used in production and if
> > so, probably in a mission-critical manner at some old-school
> > institutions (in fact, one of our customers does just that) and not as a
> > thought-experiment. It is probably well-known among Postgres hackers
> > that AIX support is problematic/a burden, but the current users might
> > not be aware of this.
> 
> Then these users should have paid somebody to actually do maintenance work on
> the AIX support,o it doesn't regularly stand in the way of implementing
> various things.

Right, absolutely.

But: did we ever tell them to do that? I don't think it's reasonable for
them to expect to follow -hackers and jump in when somebody grumbles
about AIX being a burden somewhere deep down a thread...


Michael