On April 16, 2016 6:02:39 PM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>I wrote:
>> So at this point I'm not sure what to do. I could back out the
>back-patch
>> of 44cd47c1d49655c5, which would mean accepting that 9.2/9.3 are
>broken
>> and will never be fixed for HPPA, as well as any other architectures
>that
>> use the same fallback memory barrier implementation. The lack of
>> complaints from the field suggests that nobody would care. Or I
>could
>> push forward by back-patching daa7527afc227443 (and a couple of minor
>> follow-on cleanups). That doesn't seem particularly risky, now that
>> 9.4's been out for awhile, but it's kind of a large back-patch to
>benefit
>> architectures that apparently no actual users care about.
>
>I went ahead and prepared and tested such a patch; the version for 9.3
>is attached. (9.2 is identical modulo some pgindent-induced whitespace
>difference.) This doesn't look too hazardous to me, so I'm thinking
>we should apply it.
I can't look at the patch just now, but the plan sounds good. Of you rather have somebody look art the patch before, I
cando tomorrow morning.
Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.