| From: | "Derek E(dot) Lewis" <dlewis(at)solnetworks(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: GCC builtins for atomic-test-and-set, memory barries, and such |
| Date: | 2007-09-24 05:26:25 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.A41.4.64.0709240023240.290974@hatsya.orion.const |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> I agree. I'd prefer to know exactly what's going on in the atomic
> code (rather than having the compiler take care of it for me).
> Similarly, it's pretty rare to use GCC on anything but Linux and the
> *BSDs as each proprietary UNIX vendor has their own compiler optimized
> for their own architectures and operating systems.
Absolutely. GCC seems to be the 'one size fits all' of compilers, meaning
that it generally isn't the best at optimization for a given architecture
or lacks features other, more focused compilers tend to have, like
inter-procedural analysis.
Derek E. Lewis
dlewis at solnetworks.net
http://delewis.blogspot.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-09-24 05:28:21 | Re: curious regression failures |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-09-24 04:12:10 | Re: autovacuum launcher eating too much CPU |