From: | Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE |
Date: | 2000-11-29 04:56:49 |
Message-ID: | 20001128225649.A5309@lerami.lerctr.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> [001128 22:55]:
> Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org> writes:
> >> Here is the "Current" /usr/include/machine/lock.h:
> >> ...
> >> void s_lock __P((struct simplelock *));
> >> ...
>
> Ick. Seems like the relevant question is not so much "why did it break"
> as "how did it ever manage to work"?
>
> I have no problem with renaming our s_lock, if that's what it takes,
> but I'm curious to know why there is a problem now and not before.
> We've called that routine s_lock for a *long* time, so it seems
> like there must be some factor involved that I don't see just yet...
Didn't your commit message say something about the TAS and NON-TAS
paths being the same now?
>
> regards, tom lane
--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-29 05:02:41 | Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-29 04:55:48 | Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE |