From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>,
        pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
        Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: GNU/Hurd portability patches
In-reply-to: <aNB18ZFIXXv-FR6B@paquier.xyz>
References: <6862e8d1.050a0220.194b8d.76fa@mx.google.com>
 <3245994.1751388110@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <68643ea2.050a0220.128f53.3f77@mx.google.com> <aGR04gPotq3SOaVo@paquier.xyz>
 <2874644f-6431-41f4-abe2-99e5ab052606@gmail.com>
 <aNB18ZFIXXv-FR6B@paquier.xyz>
Comments: In-reply-to Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
	message dated "Mon, 22 Sep 2025 07:02:25 +0900"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2769046.1758494886.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2025 18:48:06 -0400
Message-ID: <2769047.1758494886@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2769047.1758494886%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2025 at 09:00:00AM +0300, Alexander Lakhin wrote:
>> So it seems to me that Hurd is not mature enough yet to test Postgres.

> I'd say that it is likely not mature enough for production.  In terms
> of testing, that seems kind of OK.  However, failures like the one you
> are reporting here bring noise in the buildfarm, meaning that we would
> perhaps tend to ignore reports that are in fact legit because we don't
> really know what would be Hurd-related or Postgres-related.  Or we
> could get mixes of both.

Yeah, I think the tendency would be to write off any failures as
"Hurd teething pains" unless there are similar reports from other
animals.  As long as the failure rate is pretty low, I'm okay
with that.

			regards, tom lane