Re: memory barriers (was: Yes, WaitLatch is vulnerable to weak-memory-ordering bugs) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gurjeet Singh
Subject Re: memory barriers (was: Yes, WaitLatch is vulnerable to weak-memory-ordering bugs)
Date
Msg-id CABwTF4W3CqnGwnt8=eBsbY_6k7mtqxg=HT10SPEmSsXA4JbLpQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to memory barriers (was: Yes, WaitLatch is vulnerable to weak-memory-ordering bugs)  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: memory barriers (was: Yes, WaitLatch is vulnerable to weak-memory-ordering bugs)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been thinking about this too and actually went so far as to do
> some research and put together something that I hope covers most of
> the interesting cases.  The attached patch is pretty much entirely
> untested, but reflects my present belief about how things ought to
> work.

And, here's an updated version, with some of the more obviously broken
things fixed.

You declare dummy_spinlock variable as extren and use it, but it is not defined anywhere. Wouldn't that be a linker error?

--
Gurjeet Singh
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: HeapTupleSatisfiesToast not setting XMIN_COMMITTED?
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: memory barriers (was: Yes, WaitLatch is vulnerable to weak-memory-ordering bugs)