Hi, Instead of de-supporting platforms that don't have CAS support or providing parallel implementations we could relatively easily build a spinlock based fallback using the already existing requirement for tas(). Something like an array of 16 spinlocks, indexed by a more advanced version of ((char *)(&atomics) >> sizeof(char *)) % 16. The platforms that would fallback aren't that likely to be used under heavy concurrency, so the price for that shouldn't be too high.
The only real problem with that would be that we'd need to remove the spinnlock fallback for barriers, but that seems to be pretty much disliked. Thoughts? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
