On 9.5.2014 17:18, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tomas Vondra wrote: > >> So, if I get this right, the proposal is to have 7 animals: > > It's your machine, so you decide what you want. I'm only throwing > out some ideas. > >> 1) all branches/locales, frequent builds (every few hours) magpie >> - gcc fulmar - icc treepie - clang >> >> 2) single branch/locale, CLOBBER, built once a week magpie2 - gcc >> fulmar2 - icc treepie - clang >> >> 3) single branch/locale, recursive CLOBBER, built once a month > > Check. Not those "2" names though.
Sure. That was just for illustration purposes. >> I don't particularly mind the number of animals, although I was >> shooting for lower number. > > Consider that if the recursive clobber fails, we don't want that > failure to appear "diluted" among many successes of runs using the > same animal with non-recursive clobber. > >> The only question is - should we use 3 animals for the recursive >> CLOBBER too? I mean, one for each compiler? > > I guess it depends how likely we think that a different compiler > will change the behavior of the shared invalidation queue. Somebody > else would have to answer that. If not, then clearly we need only 5 > animals. Well, I think you're forgetting CLOBBER_FREED_MEMORY - that's not just about the invalidation queue. And I think we've been bitten by compilers optimizing out parts of the code before (e.g. because we relied on undefined behaviour). regards Tomas -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
