Re: build farm machine using mixed results - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: build farm machine using mixed results
Date
Msg-id 504CB24B.70308@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: build farm machine using mixed results  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: build farm machine using mixed results  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 09/09/2012 03:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>> On Sat, 2012-09-08 at 19:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Anyway, what I notice is that I get different types of failures, but
>>> they are all under ecpg/.  What I think we need to do is insert
>>> .NOTPARALLEL in ecpg/Makefile,
>> I'd hate that, because the ecpg build is one of the slowest parts of the
>> build, so de-parallelizing it would slow down everything quite a bit.
> There's only one bit of it that's slow, which is the bison build +
> preproc.c compile, which is necessarily serial anyway.  So I think
> trying to avoid .NOTPARALLEL there is a complete waste of effort.
> But if you wanna fix it some other way, step right up.


Yeah. I am going to add a config parameter to the buildfarm to allow 
parallelism for the "make" and "make contrib" stages, but I'm not going 
to release it until this is fixed.

(I suppose this is also a lesson to me that I should not ignore things 
like this that annoy me persistently as I did with these failures until 
Robert Creager started this discussion. It just didn't seem important 
enough.)

cheers

andrew





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol