On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2014-04-07 10:06:07 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> I'm a bit suspicious of the patches to >> static-ify stuff, since that might cause the compiler to think it >> could move things across function calls that it hadn't thought >> move-able before, but FastPathStrongLocks references would seem to be >> the obvious candidate for that, and volatile-izing it ought to have >> fixed it. I would think. > > Hm. It generally might be interesting to get a few !X86 buildfarms > running builds with LTO enabled. That might expose some dangerous > assumptions more easily.
I strongly suspect that will break stuff all over the place. We can either get compiler barriers working for real, or we can start volatile-izing every reference in an LWLock-protected critical section. Hint: the second one is insane. That might be off-topic for this issue at hand, though... -- 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
