Re: [HACKERS] removing volatile qualifiers from lwlock.c

2014-09-19 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I just tried this on my normal x86 workstation. I applied your lwlock patch and ontop I removed most volatiles (there's a couple still required) from xlog.c. Works for 100 seconds. Then I reverted the above commits.

Re: [HACKERS] removing volatile qualifiers from lwlock.c

2014-09-19 Thread Andres Freund
On 2014-09-19 13:58:17 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I just tried this on my normal x86 workstation. I applied your lwlock patch and ontop I removed most volatiles (there's a couple still required) from xlog.c. Works

Re: [HACKERS] removing volatile qualifiers from lwlock.c

2014-09-17 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2014-09-10 14:53:07 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: As discussed on the thread Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers, now that we've made the spinlock primitives function as compiler barriers (we think), it should be possible to remove volatile qualifiers from many places in the source

[HACKERS] removing volatile qualifiers from lwlock.c

2014-09-10 Thread Robert Haas
As discussed on the thread Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers, now that we've made the spinlock primitives function as compiler barriers (we think), it should be possible to remove volatile qualifiers from many places in the source code. The attached patch does this in lwlock.c. If the