Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6
Date
Msg-id 16953.1438787554@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> Ok, lets' do it that way then. It seems the easiest way to test for this
> is to use something like

> # "IBM XL C/C++ for AIX, V12.1" miscompiles, for 32-bit, some inline
> # expansions of ginCompareItemPointers() "long long" arithmetic.  To
> # take advantage of inlining, build a 64-bit PostgreSQL.
> test $(getconf HARDWARE_BITMODE) == '32' then
>    CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -DPG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE"
> fi

> in the xlc part of the template?

Actually, much the easiest way to convert what Noah did would be to add

#if defined(__ILP32__) && defined(__IBMC__)
#define PG_FORCE_DISABLE_INLINE
#endif

in src/include/port/aix.h.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Raising our compiler requirements for 9.6