Re: optimize atomic exchanges

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: optimize atomic exchanges
Date: 2023-12-15 12:56:27
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2023-12-04 15:08:57 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 12:18:05PM -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> > Barring objections or additional feedback, I think I'm inclined to press
> > forward with this one and commit it in the next week or two. I'm currently
> > planning to keep the inline assembly, but I'm considering removing the
> > configuration checks for __atomic_exchange_n() if the availability of
> > __atomic_compare_exchange_n() seems like a reliable indicator of its
> > presence. Thoughts?

I don't think we need the inline asm. Otherwise looks good.


Andres Freund

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laurenz Albe 2023-12-15 13:09:10 Re: [PATCH] Add --syntax to postgres for SQL syntax checking
Previous Message Nisha Moond 2023-12-15 12:25:09 Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby