Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2013-07-29 08:02:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> It looks like our choices are (1) teach configure to enable
>>> -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations if the compiler recognizes it,
>>> or (2) back-port commit 8137f2c32322c624e0431fac1621e8e9315202f9.
>>>
>>> I am in favor of fixing the back branches via (1), because it's less
>>> work and much less likely to break third-party extensions.
> This seems to be the agreed upon course of action, so I've prepared a
> patch including a preliminary commit message. I confirmed that it fixes
> the issue with gcc 4.8 and 9.1 for me.
Committed --- thanks for doing the legwork to check it fixes the problem.
regards, tom lane