Re: locked reads for atomics

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: locked reads for atomics
Date: 2024-02-22 19:53:50
Message-ID: f7519ac5437f1e9f1bd1bb5a4f30fad42eaa6ad7.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2024-02-22 at 12:58 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> There's some immediate use for reads/writes with barrier semantics -

Is this mainly a convenience for safety/readability? Or is it faster in
some cases than doing an atomic access with separate memory barriers?

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jacob Champion 2024-02-22 20:29:18 Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2024-02-22 19:48:22 Re: LogwrtResult contended spinlock