| From: | Hartmut Holzgraefe <hartmut(dot)holzgraefe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yuriy Zhuravlev <stalkerg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms |
| Date: | 2018-05-02 21:43:50 |
| Message-ID: | 5febd8b7-5ef3-8536-bafc-f0690dde2aa0@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02.05.2018 17:44, Robert Haas wrote:
> But having parallel make work better and more efficiently
> and with fewer hard-to-diagnose failure modes would definitely be
> nice.
that's especially a thing I haven't seen in "our" environment,
this was an area where autotools and cmake didn't really differ,
at least not for the Unix/Makefile side of things.
The only thing about parallelism I remember that it sometimes
doesn't work well with the progress percentage output of cmake
generated makefiles ... but that's purely cosmetic.
--
hartmut
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2018-05-02 21:47:38 | Re: Optimize Arm64 crc32c implementation in Postgresql |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-05-02 21:20:37 | Re: Is there a memory leak in commit 8561e48? |