Correction to comment regarding atomicity of an operation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gurjeet Singh
Subject Correction to comment regarding atomicity of an operation
Date
Msg-id CABwTF4Ubk9wc+JP0PhjPSUuty30h=k=2apii6_-1TQgdFCbghw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Correction to comment regarding atomicity of an operation  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
<div dir="ltr">This comment in UpdateFullPageWrites() seems to be inaccurate:<br /><br />     * It's safe to check the
sharedfull_page_writes without the lock,<br />     * because we assume that there is no concurrently running process
which<br/>      * can update it.<br /><br />That assumption does not hold on any sane SMP system.<br /><br />I think
thereal reason is that we assume that read/write to an integer is atomic, like we do for TransactionId variables:<br
/><br/> heapam.c: "TransactionId read/write is assumed atomic anyway."<br /><br />Best regards,<br /><br />PS: As
usual,I hope I am not missing something very obvious.<br />-- <br /><div dir="ltr">Gurjeet Singh<br /><br /><a
href="http://gurjeet.singh.im/"target="_blank">http://gurjeet.singh.im/</a><br /></div><br /></div> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Cast Operator Precedence
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Doc typo: lexems -> lexemes