On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Dan Ports <d...@csail.mit.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 06:45:54PM +0200, Robert Haas wrote: >> Yeah, I think Dan's notes about memory ordering would be good to include. > > I left it out initially because I didn't want to make things more > confusing. As far as memory ordering is concerned, this is the same > story as anything else that uses lwlocks: the spinlock memory barrier > prevents memory accesses from being reordered before the lock is > acquired. The only unusual thing here is that the lock in question > isn't the one that protects the variable we're reading. > > But I'm OK with adding a comment if you think it helps. Patch attached.
Looks good. Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
