Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oFOHN-0005JL-Kh for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2022 23:11:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oFOHM-0004nr-90 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2022 23:11:24 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oFOHL-0004ni-Vu for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2022 23:11:23 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oFOHF-0000VH-LW for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2022 23:11:23 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 26NNBC1G1241568; Sat, 23 Jul 2022 19:11:12 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Thomas Munro cc: Andres Freund , Robert Haas , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage In-reply-to: References: <20220712173352.trdeq66asbv6vf2q@awork3.anarazel.de> <1662559.1657648462@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Thomas Munro message dated "Sun, 24 Jul 2022 10:39:27 +1200" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1241566.1658617872.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2022 19:11:12 -0400 Message-ID: <1241567.1658617872@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Thomas Munro writes: > Some of these depend on SUSv2 options (not just "base"), but we > already do that (fsync, ...) and they're all features that are by now > ubiquitous, which means the fallback code is untested and the probes > are pointless. Reading this, it occurred to me that it'd be interesting to scrape all of the latest configure results from the buildfarm, and see which tests actually produce more than one answer among the set of tested platforms. Those that don't could be targets for further simplification, or else an indicator that we'd better go find some more animals. Before I go off and do that, though, I wonder if you already did. regards, tom lane