Re: Latches and barriers

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Latches and barriers
Date: 2015-01-12 16:03:42
Message-ID: 25088.1421078622@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> While it might not be required for existing latch uses (I'm *not* sure
> that's true), I still think that we should fix those XXX by actually
> using barriers now that we have them. I don't think we want every
> callsite worry about using barriers.

> Agreed?

Yeah, now that we have barrier code we think works, we should definitely
put some in there. The only reason it's like that is we didn't have
any real barrier support at the time.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-01-12 16:27:30 Re: Latches and barriers
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-01-12 15:40:26 Latches and barriers