Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A15DB64FC83 for ; Thu, 1 Jan 2009 16:56:04 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 02814-03 for ; Thu, 1 Jan 2009 16:56:01 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551D464FC41 for ; Thu, 1 Jan 2009 16:55:59 -0400 (AST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n01KtFKd010659; Thu, 1 Jan 2009 15:55:16 -0500 (EST) To: "Robert Haas" cc: "Gregory Stark" , "ITAGAKI Takahiro" , Postgres Subject: Re: posix_fadvise v22 In-reply-to: <603c8f070901011230t1afa6644racb715b975078054@mail.gmail.com> References: <8347.1229012970@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4136ffa0812110911x4914a951o6ca502879e3dede7@mail.gmail.com> <87k5a6tmy7.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> <603c8f070901011230t1afa6644racb715b975078054@mail.gmail.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Robert Haas" message dated "Thu, 01 Jan 2009 15:30:26 -0500" Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 15:55:15 -0500 Message-ID: <10658.1230843315@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200901/21 X-Sequence-Number: 130665 "Robert Haas" writes: > Am I correct in thinking that the only thing we're really checking for > here is whether a trivial posix_fadvise() call returns success? If > so, is this test really worth doing? Runtime tests performed during configure are generally a bad idea to start with --- it's impossible to do any such thing in a cross-compilation scenario, for example. regards, tom lane