On 19.12.2011 17:25, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> On 19.12.2011 16:31, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Actually, I believe our Itanium (and possibly ARM, too) implementation
>> of S_UNLOCK() is wrong as it is.
> Hmm. Anybody got a large itanium box we could play with? If it is
> wrong, I'd expect it would show up pretty quickly under pgbench or
We've been running pgbench heavily recently in the company on large HP
Itanium boxes with 32 and 64 cores, and haven't seen any issues. I'm not
sure how it would manifest itself, though. It's also possible that while
it's a genuine bug at the source level, it happens to be masked by some
compiler decisions. It sure looks wrong.
I'll try to construct a self-contained test program to exercise that.
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Martin Pitt||Date: 2011-12-19 17:11:45|
|Subject: [PATCH v2] Use CC atomic builtins as a fallback|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2011-12-19 16:12:24|
|Subject: Re: BUG #6346: unsubscribe doesn't work|