Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <
| От | Robert Haas | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+TgmoZvDkuLsx0OiVnnihie66nQA3fbmwbEcrQ5HGUxpW+ngQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст  | 
		
| Ответ на | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) | 
| Ответы | 
                	
            		Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in
 GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <
            		
            		 | 
		
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > I think generally the only platform of concern wrt is arm (< armv8), > which doesn't have 64bit atomicity and doesn't have > single-copy-atomicity for 8 byte values either (C.f. > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Atomics). That page is sort of confusing, because it says that platform has those things but then says ***, which is footnoted to mean "linux kernel emulation available", but it's not too clear whether that applies to all atomics or just 8-byte atomics. The operator precedence of / (used as a separator) vs. footnotes is not stated. It's also not clear what "linux kernel emulation available" actually means. Should we think of those things being fast, or slow? At any rate, I do actually have a Raspberry Pi 2 here so if we ever commit a patch that might suck without real 64-bit atomics we might be able to actuall test whether it does or not. But as you say, no such patch is being proposed at the moment. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: