Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Do all accesses to shared buffer headers through

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Does any of this need to be backpatched?

No --- we didn't have any per-buffer spinlocks before 8.1.

It's possible that at some point we'll need to start thinking about
applying volatile-pointer coding rules to data structures protected by
LWLocks. This could only become an issue if the compiler (a) inlines
LWLockAcquire/Release, and (b) tries to rearrange loads and stores
around the LWLock code. I would like to think that the latter is
impossible even with inlining, principally because the compiler can't
ignore the kernel calls that may occur within the LWLock routines;
those should be treated as external function calls and hence sequence
points, no matter how aggressive the compiler gets. But we'll see.

regards, tom lane