| From: | "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, chris(dot)tessels(at)inergy(dot)nl, Pg Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #13985: Segmentation fault on PREPARE TRANSACTION |
| Date: | 2016-02-26 08:34:05 |
| Message-ID: | CACACo5RhQrLh9owexYsn8BE7nEroaqV+z=rKeCa1Cg_rimv-oA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2016-02-25 09:02:07 +0100, Shulgin, Oleksandr wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:52 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hm... this is against my understanding of what a compiler could (or
> > should) do. Do you have a documentation reference or other evidence?
>
> Which part does not conform to your expectations? Moving stores/loads
> around from where they're apparently happening in the C program?
>
> Repeatedly reading from memory instead of storing something on the
> stack?
>
This one. But now that I think about it, this can buy you a free register,
so yeah it can be an optimization in some contexts.
How does compiler know this is not multi-threaded program? Only because we
don't specify any -pthread flags (assuming gcc)? Or it doesn't know/care
at all and we have to specifically turn off thread-unsafe optimizations?
--
Alex
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Tessels | 2016-02-26 09:51:52 | Re: BUG #13985: Segmentation fault on PREPARE TRANSACTION |
| Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2016-02-26 08:27:20 | Re: BUG #13988: "plan should not reference subplan's variable" whilst using row level security |