On 2014-09-23 13:50:28 +0300, Oskari Saarenmaa wrote: > 23.09.2014, 00:01, Andres Freund kirjoitti: > >I've finally managed to incorporate (all the?) feedback I got for > >0.5. Imo the current version looks pretty good. > > > >Most notable changes: > >* Lots of comment improvements > >* code moved out of storage/ into port/ > >* separated the s_lock.h changes into its own commit > >* merged i386/amd64 into one file > >* fixed lots of the little details Amit noticed > >* fixed lots of XXX/FIXMEs > >* rebased to today's master > >* tested various gcc/msvc versions > >* extended the regression tests > >* ... > > > >The patches: > >0001: The actual atomics API > > I tried building PG on Solaris 10/Sparc using GCC 4.9.0 (buildfarm animal > dingo) with this patch but regression tests failed due to: > > /export/home/os/postgresql/src/test/regress/regress.so: symbol > pg_write_barrier_impl: referenced symbol not found > > which turns out to be caused by a leftover PG_ prefix in ifdefs for > HAVE_GCC__ATOMIC_INT64_CAS. Removing the PG_ prefix fixed the build and > regression tests. Attached a patch to strip the invalid prefix.
Gah. Stupid last minute changes... Thanks for diagnosing. Will integrate. > >0002: Implement s_lock.h support ontop the atomics API. Existing > > implementations continue to be used unless > > FORCE_ATOMICS_BASED_SPINLOCKS is defined > > Applied this and built PG with and without FORCE_ATOMICS_BASED_SPINLOCKS - > both builds passed regression tests. Cool. > >0003-0005: Not proposed for review here. Just included because code > > actually using the atomics make testing them easier. > > I'll look at these patches later. Cool. Although I'm not proposing them to be integrated as-is... Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers