Re: Dynamic shared memory areas

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Dynamic shared memory areas
Date: 2016-12-02 20:02:05
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZBLbbpthm-7dQReY-kwM2vLsxcT+z+V2n4AUBN41vpyg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Thomas Munro
>> <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Please find attached dsa-v8.patch, and also a small test module for
>>> running random allocate/free exercises and dumping the internal
>>> allocator state.
>>
>> OK, I've committed the main patch.
>
> ...but the buildfarm isn't very happy about it.
>
> tern complains:
>
> In file included from dsa.c:58:0:
> ../../../../src/include/utils/dsa.h:59:1: error: unknown type name
> 'pg_atomic_uint64'
> typedef pg_atomic_uint64 dsa_pointer_atomic;
>
> ...but that code is only compiled if #if DSA_POINTER_SIZEOF == 4 fails
> to be true. And that should always be true unless
> PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SUPPORT is defined. So apparently tern claims to
> PG_HAVE_ATOMIC_U64_SUPPORT but doesn't actually define
> pg_atomic_uint64? That doesn't seem right.

No, that's not the problem. Just a garden variety thinko in dsa.h.
Will push a fix presently.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-12-02 20:05:00 Re: Wrong order of tests in findDependentObjects()
Previous Message Euler Taveira 2016-12-02 20:01:19 Re: s/xlog/wal/ in tools and function names?