From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Reorganization of spinlock defines |
Date: | 2003-09-12 02:33:54 |
Message-ID: | 5551.1063334034@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> The problem with waiting for 7.5 is that we will have no error reporting
> when our non-spinlock code is being executed, and with Opteron/Itanium,
> it seems like a good time to get it working.
Well, as long as you're prepared to reduce the list of known supported
platforms to zero as of 7.4beta3, and issue a fresh call for port reports.
But it seems to me that this is mostly a cosmetic cleanup and therefore
not the kind of thing to be doing late in beta. Couldn't we do
something that affects only Opteron/Itanium and doesn't take a chance
on breaking everything else?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-12 02:39:20 | Re: Reorganization of spinlock defines |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-12 02:29:06 | Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-12 02:39:20 | Re: Reorganization of spinlock defines |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-12 02:29:06 | Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines |