Re: Add support for AT LOCAL

Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 2:58 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> Another theory would be one of these weird compiler optimization issue
>> from xlc? In recent history, there was 8d2a01ae12cd.

> Yeah, there are more like that too. xlc 12.1 is dead (like the OS
> version it shipped with). New versions are available on cfarm if we
> care about this target. But I am conscious of the cosmic law that if
> you blame the compiler too soon you can cause the bug to move into
> your code...

I'm having a hard time not believing that this is a compiler bug.
Looking back at 8d2a01ae12cd and its speculation that xlc is overly
liberal about reordering code around sequence points ... I wonder
if it'd help to do this calculation in a local variable, and only
assign the final value to result->time ? But we have to reproduce
the problem first.

regards, tom lane