Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> Despite my concerns about keeping the list of supported atomics short,
> and I do have concerns in that area, I'm not really sure that we have
> much choice but to go in that direction. We can't accept a >5x
> performance hit in the name of portability, and that's literally what
> we're talking about in some cases. I definitely want to think
> carefully about how we proceed in this area but doing nothing doesn't
> seem like an option.
To be clear, I'm not advocating doing nothing (and I don't think anyone
else is). It's obvious based on Andres' results that we want to use
atomics on platforms where they're well-supported. The argument is
around what we're going to do for other platforms.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
