| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: removing old ports and architectures |
| Date: | 2013-10-18 17:04:44 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZS_hmqERLPQ8V9XyqaxoqRGDU0LT+kGfs26L8CpAoQntQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> FWIW, I think that if we approach coding lock free algorithms
> correctly - i.e. "which memory barriers can we avoid while being
> safe", instead of "which memory barriers we need to add to become
> safe" - then supporting Alpha isn't a huge amount of extra work.
Alpha is completely irrelevant, so I would not like to expend the
tiniest effort on supporting it. If there is someone using a very much
legacy architecture like this, I doubt that even they will appreciate
the ability to upgrade to the latest major version.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-10-18 17:12:31 | Re: removing old ports and architectures |
| Previous Message | Ants Aasma | 2013-10-18 16:55:48 | Re: removing old ports and architectures |