Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > IMHO, the way we have it now is kind of a mess. SpinLockAcquire and > SpinLockRelease are required to be CPU barriers, but they are not > required to be compiler barriers. If we changed that so that they > were required to act as barriers of both flavors,
Since they are macros, how do you propose to do that exactly? I agree that volatile-izing everything in the vicinity is a sucky solution, but the last time we looked at this there did not seem to be a better one. 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