| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jesse Zhang <sbjesse(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: A small note on the portability of cmake |
| Date: | 2019-01-20 19:31:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20190120193108.wmfnujgk2kwluutv@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2019-01-20 10:15:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > HPPA doesn't hardware instructions for atomic ops other than
> > test-and-set IIRC.
>
> Indeed, the main reason why I'm interested in keeping this old dinosaur
> going at all is that it is so different from other platforms in terms
> of what we can assume about spinlocks and atomic ops. Keeps us honest.
FWIW, while that clearly is the policy right now, I quite doubt that
it's beneficial. It's not like there's going to be new hardware
platforms without at least cmpxchg / ll/sc support. So I'm not seeing
what not requiring them keeps us honest about.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-01-20 19:31:49 | Re: explain plans with information about (modified) gucs |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2019-01-20 17:48:41 | Re: PostgreSQL vs SQL/XML Standards |