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

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Date
Msg-id 200309120409.h8C49oV06119@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
>
> 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' ...

Right, though I am not sure people will know _slow_ configuration vs.
PostgreSQL is slow.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines