Re: removing old ports and architectures

On 2013-10-14 09:42:46 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 2013-10-14 09:40:10 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> >> - PA-RISC. I think Tom was the remaining user there? Maybe just !gcc.
> >> >
> >> > Until pretty recently, there was a PA-RISC machine (not mine) in the
> >> > buildfarm. I don't see it in the list today though. In any case,
> >> > HP's compiler has always been a PITA, so no objection to requiring gcc
> >> > for this platform.
> >>
> >> I object to requiring gcc on that platform; we've had recent interest
> >> in aCC-compiled builds on that platform.
> >
> > On PA-RISC or Itanic?
>
> Oh, sorry. I think it was Itanium.

Good. Not that Itanium is nice, but it certainly supports all required
atomic ops.

I think somebody with access to that will have to figure out what
intrinsics are provided then - I haven't found reference documentation
for aCC's ia64/sys/inline.h.
I think Tom's stance that people who want a platform to be supported
need to help is reasonable. It's really hard to develop not entirely
trivial code for platforms you don't have access to and that don't even
have a buildfarm member.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services