Re: better atomics - v0.2

On 2013-11-19 10:37:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > The only animal we have that doesn't support quiet inlines today is
> > HP-UX/ac++, and I think - as in patch 1 in the series - we might be able
> > to simply suppress the warning there.
>
> Or just not worry about it, if it's only a warning?

So, my suggestion on that end is that we remove the requirement for
quiet inline now and see if it that has any negative consequences on the
buildfarm for a week or so. Imo that's a good idea regardless of us
relying on inlining support.
Does anyone have anything against that plan? If not, I'll prepare a
patch.

> Or does the warning
> mean code bloat (lots of useless copies of the inline function)?

After thinking on that for a bit, yes that's a possible consequence, but
it's quite possible that it happens in cases where we don't get the
warning too, so I don't think that argument has too much bearing as I
don't recall a complaint about it.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services