Hi, Laurynas! On Feb 07, Laurynas Biveinis wrote: > Sergei, Colin, MariaDB - > > >> >> "XtraDB storage engine was upgraded to the 5.6 version. Now one can > >> >> use XtraDB with MariaDB 10.0. Unlike MariaDB 5.5, in 10.0 XtraDB is > >> >> not the default engine, the default is InnoDB, and XtraDB is > >> >> available as a dynamic plugin" > >> >> > >> > XtraDB simply does not compile on all our builders - Percona has > >> > introduced patches that use CPU atomic ops and didn't implement a > >> > fallback for setups where they are not available (like all the rest > >> > of the code does, including InnoDB). > >> > >> Have we reported bugs upstream? > > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1276963 > > > >> Do we plan on fixing this ourselves if upstream doesn't? > > > > Not at the moment - that code is quite complex. > > In the bug report you mention RHEL 5 with GCC 4.1.2 (presumably on 32 > bits). This is one of our supported platforms too, and we solve this > by adding -march=i686 which makes the necessary builtins available. > Would that work for you?
That kind of worked. XtraDB compiled. But query_response_time failed with "unable to find a register to spill in class 'GENERAL_REGS'". Still better than before. In the worst case, I'll enable XtraDB and disable query_response_time plugin. > We have another platform-specific addition: thread-local storage > implemented by __thread GCC keyword, which is GNU specific. This is Yes, I've noticed. It caused lots of valgrind warnings because __thread implementation uses __tls_get_addr() in glibc and that allocated memory which valgrind didn't see being freed. I've added a suppression for it. > used to implement the relative XtraDB thread priorities: > http://www.percona.com/doc/percona-server/5.6/performance/xtradb_performance_improvements_for_io-bound_highly-concurrent_workloads.html#relative-thread-scheduling-priorities-for-xtradb. > On non-Linux plaftorms the feature should compile but should be > silently disabled, that is, setting innodb_sched_priority_* options > are no-ops. How big is this an issue for you? Besides this valgrind warning there were no issues so far. Or do you mean a different behavior of innodb_sched_priority_* options? I think it's ok for us, if it's ok for you :) Regards, Sergei _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
