| From: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-pkg-debian(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-pkg-debian(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: No PGDG package for ARM architecture |
| Date: | 2020-03-16 12:41:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20200316124145.GB2250185@msg.df7cb.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-pkg-debian |
Re: Amit Khandekar 2020-03-16 <CAJ3gD9e2Q9MQxa3DTbS8Jo9D_3GTKrWHyzQvqRuypHBX-=uUkA(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> So, when we see that there are N number of OS/architecture
> combinations for which PGDG does not provide packages, is it so
> because we don't have dedicated machines satisfying the minumum
> requirements like RAM/core/disk ? In other words, is it only a matter
> of providing such machine and adding it up in the buildfarm members
> where it passes the regression tests, or there are are some more
> requirements over and above the machine resource requirements after
> which PGDG can officially support those OS/architecture combinations ?
The buildfarm machines have nothing to do with the build daemons
behind apt.postgresql.org or yum.postgresql.org; they are entirely
different infrastructure.
I guess asking the buildfarm operators if they can spare machines as
build daemons might work, but I haven't had the time to dig into that.
If you care about a specific architecture, it would be nice if you
could arrange that.
Christoph
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christoph Berg | 2020-03-16 16:23:00 | Re: PostgreSQL Automatic Failover v2.3.0 released |
| Previous Message | Amit Khandekar | 2020-03-16 04:44:50 | Re: No PGDG package for ARM architecture |