Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Noah Misch writes: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 01:15:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> * I still think that the added configure test is a waste of build cycles. >> It'd be sufficient to test "#ifdef HAVE__BUILTIN_CONSTANT_P" where you >> are testing HAVE_I_CONSTRAINT__BUILTIN_CONSTANT_P, because our

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 01:15:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Noah Misch writes: > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:06:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> This still fails on Apple's compilers. ... > > > Thanks for testing. That error boils down to "need to use some other > > register". The second

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Noah Misch writes: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:06:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> This still fails on Apple's compilers. ... > Thanks for testing. That error boils down to "need to use some other > register". The second operand of addi is one of the ppc instruction operands > that can hold a

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:06:35PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Noah Misch writes: > > [ fetch-add-gcc-xlc-unify-v2.patch ] > > This still fails on Apple's compilers. The first failure I get is > > ccache gcc -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith > -Wdeclaration-after-statement

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Noah Misch writes: > [ fetch-add-gcc-xlc-unify-v2.patch ] This still fails on Apple's compilers. The first failure I get is ccache gcc -std=gnu99 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wformat-security

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 03:30:26PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote: > On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 02:27:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Noah Misch writes: > > > Done. fetch-add-variable-test-v1.patch just adds tests for non-constant > > > addends and 16-bit edge cases. Today's implementation handles those,

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 02:27:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Noah Misch writes: > > Done. fetch-add-variable-test-v1.patch just adds tests for non-constant > > addends and 16-bit edge cases. Today's implementation handles those, > > PostgreSQL doesn't use them, and I might easily have broken

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Noah Misch writes: > Done. fetch-add-variable-test-v1.patch just adds tests for non-constant > addends and 16-bit edge cases. Today's implementation handles those, > PostgreSQL doesn't use them, and I might easily have broken them. > fetch-add-xlc-asm-v1.patch moves xlc builds from the

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:36:31AM -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 08:50:24AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2018-01-16 16:12:11 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 12:26:50AM +, Noah Misch wrote: > > > > Since this emits double syncs with older

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> If nobody is willing to put in the effort to keep AIX supported under >> XLC, then we should just update the documentation to say that it isn't >> supported. Our support for that platform is pretty marginal anyway if >>

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:23:55PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: >> I agree with Noah. It's true that having unfixed bugs isn't >> particularly good, but it doesn't justify activating a CommitFest >> entry under someone else's name. > > Agreed. The CF app

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Robert Haas writes: > I agree with Noah. It's true that having unfixed bugs isn't > particularly good, but it doesn't justify activating a CommitFest > entry under someone else's name. Agreed. The CF app is not a bug tracker. > If nobody is willing to put in the effort

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:36:31AM -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > For me, verifiability is the crucial benefit of inline asm. Anyone with an > architecture manual can thoroughly review an inline asm implementation. Given > intrinsics and __xlc_ver__ conditionals, the same level of review requires >

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Am Dienstag, den 16.01.2018, 08:25 + schrieb REIX, Tony: > I've been able to compare PostgreSQL compiled with XLC vs GCC 7.1 > and, using times outputs provided by PostgreSQL tests, XLC seems to > provide at least 8% more speed. We also plan to run professional > performance tests in order to

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 08:50:24AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2018-01-16 16:12:11 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 12:26:50AM +, Noah Misch wrote: > > > Since this emits double syncs with older xlc, I recommend instead > > > replacing > > > the whole thing with

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On 2018-01-16 16:12:11 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 12:26:50AM +, Noah Misch wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 02:39:25PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > >> @@ -73,11 +73,19 @@ pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32_impl(volatile > >> pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr, > >> static

RE:[HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

: Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 01:50:29PM +, REIX, Tony wrote: > And, on BuildFarm, I do not see any details about the logical/physical > configuration of the AIX VMs, like hornet. > Being able to run real concurrent parallel stress programs,

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On 01/16/2018 08:50 AM, REIX, Tony wrote: > Hi Michael > > You said: > >> Setting up a buildfarm member with the combination of compiler and >> environment where you are seeing the failures would be the best answer >> in my opinion: >> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto

RE:[HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Hi Michael You said: > Setting up a buildfarm member with the combination of compiler and > environment where you are seeing the failures would be the best answer > in my opinion: > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto > > This does not require special knowledge of

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 08:25:51AM +, REIX, Tony wrote: > My team and my company (ATOS/Bull) are involved in improving the > quality of PostgreSQL on AIX. Cool to hear that! > We have AIX 6.1, 7.1, and 7.2 Power8 systems, with several > logical/physical processors. And I plan to have a more

RE:[HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

Hackers; Bernd Helmle Objet : Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 12:26:50AM +, Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 02:39:25PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> @@ -73,11 +73,19 @@ pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32_impl(volatile >> pg_atomic_u

Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX

On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 12:26:50AM +, Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 02:39:25PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> @@ -73,11 +73,19 @@ pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32_impl(volatile >> pg_atomic_uint32 *ptr, >> static inline uint32 >> pg_atomic_fetch_add_u32_impl(volatile