Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> I don't think that's the right attitude to take, at all. Why not just
>> use a lock? It's not like the overhead will be noticeable.
> Probably, but none of the other code appears to take a lock out on it :)
Huh? It doesn't use a lock for touching the checkpoint counters, but
that's OK because they're sig_atomic_t.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
