Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From andres@anarazel.de
Subject Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
Date
Msg-id 20160105155326.GC7650@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2016-01-05 10:48:43 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Jan  5, 2016 at 04:42:24PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2016-01-05 10:40:13 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan  5, 2016 at 04:31:15PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > On 2016-01-05 10:28:25 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > Yes? But it's ok sizewise on the common platforms?
> > > 
> > > What is the uncommon part?  I guess I missed that.
> > 
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20151212181702.GH17938%40alap3.anarazel.de
> 
> Yes, I saw that, and the URL in the email, but what is the uncommon
> case?

Are you asking which platforms s_lock is larger than a char? If so, grep
s_lock.h for typedefs. If not, I'm not following what you're asking for?



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: commitfest html - wrong closing tag
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches