Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE
От | Larry Rosenman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20001128225649.A5309@lerami.lerctr.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: LOCK Fixes/Break on FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> [001128 22:55]: > Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org> writes: > >> Here is the "Current" /usr/include/machine/lock.h: > >> ... > >> void s_lock __P((struct simplelock *)); > >> ... > > Ick. Seems like the relevant question is not so much "why did it break" > as "how did it ever manage to work"? > > I have no problem with renaming our s_lock, if that's what it takes, > but I'm curious to know why there is a problem now and not before. > We've called that routine s_lock for a *long* time, so it seems > like there must be some factor involved that I don't see just yet... Didn't your commit message say something about the TAS and NON-TAS paths being the same now? > > regards, tom lane -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: