Thread: ipc_test
Does anybody care about being able to compile ipc_test as a standalone binary any more? I ask because, while working on some of the outstanding cleanup issues around dynamic shared memory, I made sure to test whether it required further adjustments based on the changes that I'd done, only to discover that it was already broken by the huge pages patch: [rhaas pgsql]$ make -C src/backend/port ipc_test gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wformat-security -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv -g -Wall -Werror -L../../../src/port -L../../../src/common -L/opt/local/lib -Wl,-dead_strip_dylibs -Wall -Werror ipc_test.o pg_sema.o pg_shmem.o -lpgcommon -lpgport -lintl -lxml2 -lssl -lcrypto -lz -lreadline -lm -o ipc_test Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64: "_huge_pages", referenced from: _PGSharedMemoryCreate in pg_shmem.o ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64 collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [ipc_test] Error 1 My judgement is that ipc_test has insufficient utility to justify keeping it around and updating it every time sysv_shmem.c references a new symbol or experiences a relevant calling signature change. So I'd favor just ripping it out. I doubt we're likely to have any completely new semaphore or shared memory implementations that require this kind of testing any time soon, and even if we do I think whoever is doing it can quite easily put together a bespoke testing framework that will likely serve their needs at least as well as ipc_test does. It was probably quite reasonable to add this 12 years ago but I just don't think we need it any more. All that having been said, if somebody feels strongly that this is still useful, I'd rather just fix it than argue about it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Hi, On 2014-04-04 09:31:01 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > Does anybody care about being able to compile ipc_test as a standalone > binary any more? I don't. But if we want to keep it, it should be built during a normal build to make sure it doesn't get broken. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2014-04-04 09:31:01 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Does anybody care about being able to compile ipc_test as a standalone
>> binary any more?
> I don't.
I can't remember the last time I had use for it either. +1 for removal.
> But if we want to keep it, it should be built during a normal build to
> make sure it doesn't get broken.
Yup.
regards, tom lane
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 2014-04-04 09:31:01 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >>> Does anybody care about being able to compile ipc_test as a standalone >>> binary any more? > >> I don't. > > I can't remember the last time I had use for it either. +1 for removal. OK, done. One less thing to worry about when committing! -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, done. One less thing to worry about when committing! Also one less thing to cause headaches with etags and similar tools. It always drove me nuts that I was constantly being sent to ipc_test files for various typedefs. Thanks! -- greg
Greg Stark wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > OK, done. One less thing to worry about when committing! > > Also one less thing to cause headaches with etags and similar tools. > It always drove me nuts that I was constantly being sent to ipc_test > files for various typedefs. Thanks! Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Thanks. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 02:08:25PM -0400, Greg Stark wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > OK, done. One less thing to worry about when committing! > > Also one less thing to cause headaches with etags and similar tools. > It always drove me nuts that I was constantly being sent to ipc_test > files for various typedefs. Thanks! Oh, yeah, that was a _big_ pain. Thanks! -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +