Re: PostgreSQL for VAX on NetBSD/OpenBSD - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:05 PM, John Klos <john@ziaspace.com> wrote:
> While I wouldn't be surprised if you remove the VAX code because not many
> people are going to be running PostgreSQL, I'd disagree with the assessment
> that this port is broken. It compiles, it initializes databases, it runs, et
> cetera, albeit not with the default postgresql.conf.


So I've been playing with this a bit. I have simh running on my home
server as a Vax  3900 with NetBSD 6.1.5. My home server was mainly
intended to be a SAN and its cpu is woefully underpowered so the
resulting VAX is actually very very slow. So slow I wonder if there's
a bug in the emulator but anyways.

I'm coming to the conclusion that the port doesn't really work
practically speaking but the failures are more interesting than I
expected. They come in a few varieties:

1) Vax does not have IEEE fp. This manifests in a few ways, some of
which may be our own bugs or missing expected outputs. The numeric
data type maths often produce numbers rounded off differently, the
floating point tests print numbers one digit shorter than our expected
results expect and sometimes in scientific notation where we don't
expect. The overflow tests generate floating point exceptions rather
than overflows. Infinity and NaN don't work. The Json code in
particular generates large numbers where +/- Infinity literals are
supplied.

There are some planner tests that fail with floating point exceptions
-- that's probably a bug on our part. And I've seen at least one
server crash (maybe two) apparently caused by one as well which I
don't believe is expected.

2) The initdb problem is actually not our fault. It looks like a
NetBSD kernel bug when allocating large shared memory blocks on a
machine without lots of memory. There's not much initdb can do with a
kernel panic...  BSD still has the problem of kern.maxfiles defaulting
to a value low enough that even two connections causes the regression
tests to run out of file descriptors. That's documented and it would
be a right pain for initdb to detect that case.

3) The tests take so long to run that autovacuum kicks in and the
tests start producing rows in inconsistent orderings. I assume that's
a problem we've run into on the CLOBBER_CACHE animals as well?

4) One of the tablesample tests seems to freeze indefinitely. I
haven't looked into why yet. That might indeed indicate that the
spinlock code isn't working?

So my conclusion tentatively is that while the port doesn't actually
work practically speaking it is nevertheless uncovering some
interesting bugs.

-- 
greg