Re: Atomics in localbuf.c

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Atomics in localbuf.c
Date: 2020-03-06 19:06:41
Message-ID: 20200306190641.ak432cz2vbhurtvy@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2020-03-06 11:26:41 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 2:04 AM Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> > ok. What I missed is that BufferDesc.state is declared as pg_atomic_uint32
> > rather than plain int, so the pg_atomic_...() functions should be used
> > regardless the buffer is shared or local. Sorry for the noise.
>
> Right. I thought, though, that your question was why we did it that
> way instead of just declaring them as uint32. I'm not sure it's very
> important, but I think that question hasn't really been answered.

I tried, at least:

> Since local/shared buffers share the buffer header definition, we still have to use proper functions to access
> the atomic variables.

There's only one struct BufferDesc. We could separate them out /
introduce a union or such. But that'd add some complexity / potential
for mistakes too.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aleksei Ivanov 2020-03-06 19:09:23 Re: Proposal: PqSendBuffer removal
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2020-03-06 19:01:19 Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Effective storage of duplicates in B-tree index.