Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgbench internal contention

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgbench internal contention
Date: 2011-08-03 00:44:09
Message-ID: 3464.1312332249@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> If you want erand48_r, best to provide that API, not kluge up some
>> other functions.

> ...because erand48() is a GNU extension with a stupid API.

I assume you mean erand48_r, there, because erand48 is pretty standard.

> I don't
> see much value in supporting that, on both counts.  We're going to end
> up with the built-in erand48_r() on precisely those systems that use
> glibc, and our own everywhere else.  For the 25 SLOCs it's going cost
> us, I'd rather use the same code everywhere.

Maybe.  But if that's the approach we want to use, let's just call it
pg_erand48 in the code, and dispense with the alias macros as well as
all vestiges of configure support.

BTW, as far as the original plan of using random_r is concerned, how
did you manage to not run into this?
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3662
I just wasted half an hour on that stupidity in an unrelated context...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-08-03 02:27:53
Subject: Re: pgbench internal contention
Previous:From: Peter GeogheganDate: 2011-08-02 23:52:17
Subject: Further news on Clang - spurious warnings

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group