On 2018-02-27 13:43:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2018-02-27 10:36:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> However, those are presumably rare configurations that many people
> >> (including many developers) don't care about.
>
> > I don't think that's quite true anymore. We e
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2018-02-27 10:36:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> However, those are presumably rare configurations that many people
>> (including many developers) don't care about.
> I don't think that's quite true anymore. We e.g. now rely on 64bit
> atomics being emulated on some mac
Hi,
On 2018-02-27 10:36:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Aleksander Alekseev
> We tried to follow commit messages [1] and discussions [2]. However no matter
> how you try to look on this code it's weird.
I don't see how that makes the code weird. Not fit for your pu
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:49 AM, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
> We would like to know whether you share this concern and whether it
> would be a good idea to try to refactor the code so that atomics could
> be used not only from the backend.
I think the concern on the referenced threads was that at
Hello hackers,
My colleague Anastasia Lubennikova and I were discussing a weird piece
of code in src/include/port/atomics.h:
```
#ifdef FRONTEND
#error "atomics.h may not be included from frontend code"
#endif
```
We tried to follow commit messages [1] and discussions [2]. However no