Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals?

On 2014-05-02 21:07:55 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 05:04:01PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote:
> > There's pretty little coverage of non mainstream platforms/compilers in
> > the buildfarm atm. Maybe we should send an email on -announce asking for
> > new ones?
> > There's no coverage for OS-wise;
> > * AIX (at all)
> > * HP-UX (for master at least)
> > (* Tru64)
> > (* UnixWare)
> >
> > Architecture wise there's no coverage for:
> > * some ARM architecture varians
> > * mips
> > * s390/x
> > * sparc 32bit
> > (* s390)
> > (* alpha)
> > (* mipsel)
> > (* M68K)
> >
> > A couple of those aren't that important (my opinion indicated by ()),
> > but the other ones really should be covered or desupported.
>
> More coverage of non-gcc compilers would be an asset to the buildfarm.
>
> +1 for sending a call for help to -announce. I agree with your importance
> estimates, particularly on the OS side. -1 for making code-level changes to
> "desupport" a platform based on the lack of a buildfarm member, though I don't
> mind documentation/advocacy changes on that basis.

I was thinking of changing
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/supported-platforms.html to
list untested platforms similar to the way M32R and VAX are
documented. I.e. code exists, but we have no clue whether it works.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

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