On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 11:03 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Next decade's hot new processor design might do things > > differently enough that it matters that we use SpinLockInit() > > not memset-to-zero. This is not academic either, as we've had > > exactly such bugs in the past. > > FWIW, I'l like to make spinlocks and atomics assert out if they've not > been initialized (which'd include preventing uninitialized use of > lwlocks). It's easy to accidentally zero out the state or start out > uninitialized. Right now nothing will complain on platforms created > after 1700 or using --disable-spinlocks --disable-atomics. That should > be caught well before running on the buildfarm...
I don't understand this bit about platforms created after 1700. Before 1700, they didn't even have computers. Am I being really dense here? -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
