On 2015-06-29 22:58:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > So personally, I would be inclined to put back the volatile qualifier, > independently of any fooling around with _Asm_double_magic_xyzzy > calls.
I'm not sure. I think the reliance on an explicit memory barrier is a lot more robust and easy to understand than some barely documented odd behaviour around volatile. On the other hand the old way worked for a long while. I'm inclined to just do both on platforms as odd as IA6. But it'd like to let anole run with the current set a bit longer - if it doesn't work we have more problems than just S_UNLOCK(). It seems EDB has increased the run rate for now, so it shouldn't take too long: http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_history.pl?nm=anole&br=HEAD 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
