Re: [SPAM] Re: posix_fadvise v22 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [SPAM] Re: posix_fadvise v22
Date
Msg-id 4961C80C.6030307@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [SPAM] Re: posix_fadvise v22  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [SPAM] Re: posix_fadvise v22  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Gregory Stark wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> 
>> On Friday 02 January 2009 06:49:57 Greg Stark wrote:
>>> The guc run-time check is checking for known-buggy versions of glibc  
>>> using sysconf to check what version of glibc you have.
>> Could you please mention the bug number in the relevant source code comments?
> 
> It's Debian bug# 312406 which was fixed in Debian release 2.3.5-3. So it's
> probably one of these but searching for posix_fadvise doesn't find anything in
> their bug tracker:

The way I read this is that this was a temporary kernel/libc mismatch in 
a development version of Debian 3 years ago that was fixed within 2 
months of being reported and was never released to the general public. 
So it would be on the same level as any of a million temporary breakages 
in Linux distributions under development.

Unless there are other reports of this problem, I wouldn't bother 
testing or working around this at all.  If people are running PostgreSQL  8.4+ on Debian unstable June 2005 with kernel
2.4,they cannot be helped.
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: version() output vs. 32/64 bits
Next
From: "Merlin Moncure"
Date:
Subject: Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4?