Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] Try again: S_LOCK reduced contention

From: "Matthew N(dot) Dodd" <winter(at)jurai(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: David Gould <dg(at)illustra(dot)com>, rkirkpat(at)nag(dot)cs(dot)colorado(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] Try again: S_LOCK reduced contention
Date: 1998-06-10 07:24:50
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.3.96.980610032348.17992I-100000@sasami.jurai.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Quite and analysis. I want to comment on the code more, but I just want
> to point out now that many of our i386 platforms are not GNU. I think
> we have to use macros. I can't think of any GNU-specific code in the
> source tree at this point, and I don't think it makes sense add it now
> just to make the code look a litter cleaner.

Indeed. Those of use who have thousand dollar SunPro compilers thank you.

(can you say progressive optomizer?)

/*
Matthew N. Dodd | A memory retaining a love you had for life
winter(at)jurai(dot)net | As cruel as it seems nothing ever seems to
http://www.jurai.net/~winter | go right - FLA M 3.1:53
*/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Gould 1998-06-10 07:56:48 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] Try again: S_LOCK reduced contention
Previous Message David Gould 1998-06-10 05:53:37 Re: [PATCHES] Try again: S_LOCK reduced contention