Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow Pin/UnpinBuffer to operate in a lockfree manner.

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow Pin/UnpinBuffer to operate in a lockfree manner.
Date: 2016-04-12 04:03:35
Message-ID: 20160412040335.7melgsixigrhr656@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On 2016-04-11 23:59:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > Will fix (both initialization and use of pg_atomic_fetch_or_u32), and
> > expand the documentation on why only atomic read/write are supposed to
> > be used.
>
> FWIW, I'd vote against adding a SpinLockInit there.

Well, it'd not be a SpinLockInit, but a pg_atomic_init_u32(), but ...

> What it would mostly
> do is prevent noticing future mistakes of the same ilk. It would be
> better no doubt if we didn't have to rely on a nearly-dead platform
> to detect this; but having such detection of a performance bug is better
> than having no detection.

Ok, works for me as well. I guess it'd be useful to add a "modern"
animal that disables spinlocks & atomics...

- Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-04-12 04:32:13 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow Pin/UnpinBuffer to operate in a lockfree manner.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-04-12 03:59:21 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow Pin/UnpinBuffer to operate in a lockfree manner.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-04-12 04:32:13 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow Pin/UnpinBuffer to operate in a lockfree manner.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-04-12 03:59:21 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Allow Pin/UnpinBuffer to operate in a lockfree manner.