| From: | AIX PG user <postgres-ibm-aix(at)wwpdl(dot)vnet(dot)ibm(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | AIX PG user <postgres-ibm-aix(at)wwpdl(dot)vnet(dot)ibm(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: AIX support |
| Date: | 2025-10-16 15:28:00 |
| Message-ID: | 176062848036.68507.311595310346050481.pgcf@coridan.postgresql.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Peter,
Thank you for your comments.
We’ve had a few discussions in the past regarding the changes related to the
spin lock. Some of those conversations stemmed from this thread:
"https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/95a44be0-b2f8-464a-8984-771d892b1cac%40iki.fi"
The earlier assembly code was generic across the PPC platform. However, based
on previous discussions, we transitioned to using GCC-specific routines to
enhance platform independence and maintain generality.
These are the comments I have added, let me know if you need more info here.
+/* On PPC, use the compiler provided Built-in functions for atomic memory
+ * exchange operations.
+ */
For reference, here are some benchmark statistics we gathered earlier:
"https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CY8PR15MB5602EB54EFE30D4C21F061BEDB722%40CY8PR15MB5602.namprd15.prod.outlook.com"
I'll run some more benchmarking on this sync_lock and submit the results.
Meanwhile, it would be helpful if you and your team could take a look at the remaining changes.
Thank you,
Sriram.
The new status of this patch is: Needs review
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Jones | 2025-10-16 15:35:41 | Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement |
| Previous Message | Philip Alger | 2025-10-16 15:22:01 | Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_trigger_ddl() to retrieve the CREATE TRIGGER statement |