Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Marc G. Fournier
Subject Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Date
Msg-id 20030912010548.V57860@ganymede.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
List pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Well, the problem was that we defined HAS_TEST_AND_SET inside the ports.
> I guess we could splatter a test for Itanium and Opterion in every port
> that could possibly use it, but then again, if we fall back to not
> finding it for some reason, we don't get a report because we silently
> fall back to semaphores.  That's what has me worried, that if we don't
> do it, we will not know what platforms really aren't working properly.

From what I understand, "not working properly" means slow, not broken, no?
Which means ppl could submit a problem report and it could be fixed for
v7.4.1 ... its not so much  'not working properly' as it is 'not optimal
performance' ...

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Next
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines