Re: Drop 32-bit support (was "Re: Fix typo 586/686 in atomics/arch-x86.h")

Jakub Wartak <jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> I propose simply for now that that if there's consensus to drop the 32-bits
> support,

I do not believe there is any such consensus, and I for one am against it.

What was being discussed in the other thread was dropping some dedicated
code paths for 32-bit arches, which is in line with the general policy
that we've had for awhile of not optimizing for such builds anymore.
But there's a long way from that to "it won't work at all".

> The only trouble I see is that we should probalby excplictly continue to
> provide 32-bit client support (to allow embedded clients/IOT to continue).

Yes, that's one of the good reasons for not dropping it altogether.
*Maybe* there is an argument for not supporting 32-bit servers anymore,
but I don't really buy that.  Also, how are you going to test a 32-bit
client build if the server has to be somewhere else?  Building
infrastructure to support that would quickly eat up whatever win is
to be had.

            regards, tom lane