Theo Schlossnagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd remind everyone that the spinlock stuff is entirely optional at 
> build time.

Not really.  The performance hit for not having hardware spinlocks is
so severe that it's not considered a reasonable fallback.

> I also think it immensely useful to replace all of the tas subsystem 
> with cas so that one could reliabily lock these atomics with the process 
> id of the locker.

I cannot, ever once in my years working on Postgres, remember having
wanted such a thing.  I am strongly against mucking with the spinlock
code for mere aesthetics --- it's too fragile and hard to test,
especially on platforms you don't have ready access to.

In short, it ain't broken and we don't need to fix it.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to