Re: Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers
Date
Msg-id 78643.1403822411@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers
Re: Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2014-06-26 14:13:07 -0700, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Surely it had better be a read barrier as well?

> I don't immediately see why it has to be read barrier? Hoisting a load
> from after the release into the locked area of code should be safe?

No doubt, but delaying a read till after the unlocking write would
certainly not be safe.

AFAICT, README.barrier completely fails to define what we think the
semantics of pg_read_barrier and pg_write_barrier actually are, so if
you believe that a write barrier prevents reordering of reads relative to
writes, you'd better propose some new text for that file.  It certainly
doesn't say that today.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #10728: json_to_recordset with nested json objects NULLs columns
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers