From: | Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc> |
---|---|
To: | Jeremy Drake <pgsql(at)jdrake(dot)com> |
Cc: | Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta |
Date: | 2006-09-14 08:39:53 |
Message-ID: | 45091559.7090400@tomd.cc |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeremy Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Tom Dunstan wrote:
>
>> I was under the impression that most VM products are x86 centric, which
>> wouldn't lead to huge amounts of diversity in the buildfarm results. At least,
>> not as far as architecture goes.
>
> I have played with QEmu (www.qemu.org) which is open source and supports
> multiple target architectures. I'm not sure how stable all of the
> different targets are, I know that sparc64 is not quite done yet.
Oh, I didn't realize Qemu did non-x86 architectures. Is it considered
good enough at emulating e.g. a sparc for it to be useful to us? PearPC
was a PowerPC emulator that got some press a while ago, although it
appears that the project has stagnated a bit (probably because people
who wanted to run OSX on intel hardware have a legit way to do it now :) )
The problem with these things is if something goes wrong, was it the
patch that failed or the not-quite-perfect VM product? To cut down on
those sorts of problems, I suppose we could have it do a clean,
non-patched run first, and then only do the patched version if the clean
version passed. We'd have to be reasonably unlucky to have a patch
trigger a VM bug under those circumstance, I would think.
Cheers
Tom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sergey E. Koposov | 2006-09-14 09:42:06 | Re: Draft release notes |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2006-09-14 07:40:27 | Re: Draft release notes |