Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> writes:
> Um, you have been burned by exactly this on x86 also:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-03/msg01265.php
Yeah, we never did figure out exactly how come you were observing that
failure on Intel-ish hardware. I was under the impression that Intel
machines didn't have weak-memory-ordering behavior.
I wonder whether your compiler had rearranged the code in ProcArrayAdd
so that the increment happened before the array element store at the
machine-code level. I think it would be entitled to do that under
standard C semantics, since that ProcArrayStruct pointer isn't marked
volatile.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
