Horton

Re: better atomics - v0.2

Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Ants Aasma <ants@cybertec.at>
Date: 2013-11-19T15:43:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2013-11-19 10:37:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > The only animal we have that doesn't support quiet inlines today is
> > HP-UX/ac++, and I think - as in patch 1 in the series - we might be able
> > to simply suppress the warning there.
> 
> Or just not worry about it, if it's only a warning?  Or does the warning
> mean code bloat (lots of useless copies of the inline function)?

I honestly have no idea whether it causes code bloat - I'd be surprised
if it did since it detects that they are unused, but I cannot rule it
out entirely.
The suggested patch - untested since I have no access to HP-UX - just
adds +W2177 to the compiler's commandline in template/hpux which
supposedly suppressed that warning.

I think removing the quiet inline test is a good idea, but that doesn't
preclude fixing the warnings at the same time.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Avoid the use of a separate spinlock to protect a LWLock's wait queue.

  2. Improve LWLock scalability.

  3. Reduce the number of semaphores used under --disable-spinlocks.

  4. Alter the configure script to fail immediately if the C compiler does not