Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Date: 2003-09-13 03:03:33
Message-ID: 1460.1063422213@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com> writes:
> Is the Itanium tas implementation correct?

FWIW, this evening I did a few dozen iterations of "make check" parallel
regression tests on a 4-way Itanium box at Red Hat's Toronto office,
working from CVS-tip sources. No sign of problems. That's not a proof
of correctness, of course, but it does give me some confidence ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2003-09-13 04:08:05 Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-09-13 00:49:55 Re: Reorganization of spinlock defines

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2003-09-13 04:08:05 Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-09-13 02:51:33 Re: tsearch pfree error