Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>
Cc: "''''pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org' ' ' '" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question
Date: 2004-01-13 14:57:05
Message-ID: 11202.1074005825@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com> writes:
> Or, maybe we'll just use the tas() implementation that already exists for
> __i386__/__x86_64__ in s_lock.h. How did I miss that?
> Move along. Nothing to see here.

Actually, I was expecting you to complain that the s_lock.h coding is
gcc-specific. Which compilers do we need to support on Windows?

We might have to fall back to something comparable to the CVS-tip s_lock
support for hppa: inline assembler in s_lock.h for gcc, and a separate
assembly source file for use with vendor compiler(s).

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manfred Spraul 2004-01-13 16:38:51 Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-01-13 14:54:23 Re: LWLock/ShmemIndex startup question