Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature Request: vtctldclient for arm64 #17225

Closed
erikschul opened this issue Nov 13, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Feature Request: vtctldclient for arm64 #17225

erikschul opened this issue Nov 13, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
Component: Build/CI Status: Won't Implement Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)

Comments

@erikschul
Copy link

Feature Description

When using a Macbook to administrate a remote amd64 cluster, it may be relevant to use vtctldclient locally (at least the guide suggests so).

Could such local CLI tools be made available for arm64, even if Vitess itself cannot support arm64?

Possibly related:

Unrelated discussions:

Use Case(s)

.

@erikschul erikschul added the Needs Triage This issue needs to be correctly labelled and triaged label Nov 13, 2024
@mattlord
Copy link
Contributor

mattlord commented Nov 13, 2024

You can build and run Vitess on arm64 Linux and macOS (myself and many other maintainers use arm64 Macs). We do not provide release builds or docker images for them today.

@erikschul
Copy link
Author

Thanks! I'll try that.
It wasn't clear from the previous issues whether there were problems in compiling and running on arm64.

Have you considered cross-compiling on x86 builders to arm64? You could possibly have a separate 'experimental' release and later use multi-arch, to gather more data points.

@shlomi-noach
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for the suggestion! Unfortunately at this time we're not considering cross compiling to arm64 as part of an official release flow. Releases are quite complex as it is and involve many dependencies and release stages. I think building for arm64 is at a lower priority release-wise. But as @mattlord mentioned, many of the maintainers run on max/arm64 and we'd be the first to know if builds are failing.

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Build/CI Status: Won't Implement and removed Needs Triage This issue needs to be correctly labelled and triaged labels Nov 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: Build/CI Status: Won't Implement Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants