Re: Sync Rep v17
| От | Marti Raudsepp |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Sync Rep v17 |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTimsfNE2H4xaY6cwiyp5i7JDMwpx3ZZTucYp=KT-@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Sync Rep v17 (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Sync Rep v17
Re: Sync Rep v17 |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 07:38, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > + SpinLockAcquire(&WalSndCtl->ctlmutex); > + result = WalSndCtl->sync_rep_service_available; > + SpinLockRelease(&WalSndCtl->ctlmutex); > volatile pointer needs to be used to prevent code rearrangement. I don't think that's necessary. Spinlock functions already prevent reordering using __asm__ __volatile__ Otherwise, surely they would be utterly broken? Regards, Marti
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: