On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 01:15:55PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> LGTM otherwise.
+1
--
nathan
Andres Freund writes:
> How about:
> /*
> * pg_atomic_unlocked_write_u32 - unlocked write to atomic variable.
> *
> * Write to an atomic variable, without atomicity guarantees. I.e. it is not
> * guaranteed that a concurent reader will not see a torn value, nor to
grammar police: s/nor to/no
Hi,
On 2025-12-04 10:03:22 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 10:56:12AM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> > The whole point of the _unlocked_ function is to use it for modifying an
> > atomic that doesn't need to actually be atomic when modified by that
> > function. The current u
On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 10:56:12AM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> The whole point of the _unlocked_ function is to use it for modifying an
> atomic that doesn't need to actually be atomic when modified by that
> function. The current use-case for it is to to modify BufferDesc->state for
> temporary
Hi,
On 2025-12-04 09:51:10 -0600, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 11:40:47PM +, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Add pg_atomic_unlocked_write_u64
> >
> > The 64bit equivalent of pg_atomic_unlocked_write_u32(), to be used in an
> > upcoming patch converting BufferDesc.state into a 64bi
On Wed, Dec 03, 2025 at 11:40:47PM +, Andres Freund wrote:
> Add pg_atomic_unlocked_write_u64
>
> The 64bit equivalent of pg_atomic_unlocked_write_u32(), to be used in an
> upcoming patch converting BufferDesc.state into a 64bit atomic.
I noticed that this new function was defined as
