Re: AIX support
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Commits
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Restore AIX support.
- 4a1b05caa55d 19 (unreleased) landed
-
pg_createsubscriber: Improve error messages.
- 898c131b58a0 18.0 cited
-
Use <stdint.h> and <inttypes.h> for c.h integers.
- 962da900ac8f 18.0 cited
-
Stabilize jsonb_path_query test case.
- af2115226831 18.0 cited
-
Fix C23 compiler warning
- d2b4b4c2259e 18.0 cited
-
pg_stat_statements: Add tests for nested queries with level tracking
- 45e0ba30fc40 18.0 cited
-
Add missing newline at the end of index_including.sql
- 54b69f1bd730 17.0 cited
-
Remove AIX support
- 0b16bb8776bb 17.0 cited
-
Fix s_lock.h PPC assembly code to be compatible with native AIX assembler.
- c41a1215f049 9.6.0 cited
-
Use a non-locking initial test in TAS_SPIN on PPC.
- bc2a050d4097 9.2.0 cited
-
Use LWSYNC in place of SYNC/ISYNC in PPC spinlocks, where possible.
- 631beeac3598 9.2.0 cited
-
Use mutex hint bit in PPC LWARX instructions, where possible.
- 5cfa8dd3007d 9.2.0 cited
-
Adjust TAS assembly as per recent discussions: use "+m"(*lock) everywhere
- 109867748259 8.0.0 cited
-
Apple's assembler likes the inlined TAS syntax too, so no reason to
- f9ba0a7fe563 7.4.1 cited
-
Tighten up register usage for inline PPC version of tas().
- eb5e4c58d137 7.4.1 cited
-
Put the isync where it's supposed to be.
- cd35d601b859 7.4.1 cited
-
> > I'll re-check that with the ppc architecture guy here.
- ceb4f5ea9c2c 7.4.1 cited
-
Fix PPC s_lock operations to work correctly on multi-CPU machines.
- 7233aae50bea 7.3.1 cited
-
I tried to build PostgreSQL with the following step to see backends hung
- 50938576d482 7.3.1 cited
-
Complete merge of all old man page information.
- f2f43efbe1d5 7.1.1 cited
-
s_lock aix patch.
- e3b06a871b63 7.1.1 cited
On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 9:57 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: > If you make no changes to s_lock.h at all, will it work? Why not? It's good to keep the work independent and I don't want to hold up anything happening in this thread, but just for information: I have been poking around at the idea of entirely removing the old spinlock code and pointing spin.h's function-like-macros to the atomics code. We couldn't do that before, because atomics were sometimes implemented with spinlocks, but now that pg_atomic_flag is never implemented with spinlocks we can flip that around, and then have only one place where we know how to do this stuff. What is needed for that to progress is, I guess, to determine though assembler analysis or experimentation across a bunch of targets that it works out at least as good... https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CA%2BhUKGJ%2BoA%2B62iUZ-EQb5R2cAOW3Y942ZoOtzOD%3D1sQ05iNg6Q%40mail.gmail.com#23598cafac3dd08ca94fa9e2228a4764