Re: [HACKERS] bitfield and gcc

2012-02-15 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Marti Raudsepp wrote: > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 01:54, Gaetano Mendola wrote: >> I wonder if somewhere in Postgres source "we" are relying on the GCC >> "correct behaviour" regarding the read-modify-write of bitfield in >> structures. > > Probably not. I'm pretty

Re: [HACKERS] bitfield and gcc

2012-02-13 Thread Marti Raudsepp
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 01:54, Gaetano Mendola wrote: > I wonder if somewhere in Postgres source "we" are relying on the GCC > "correct behaviour" regarding the read-modify-write of bitfield in > structures. Probably not. I'm pretty sure that we don't have any bitfields, since not all compilers a

[HACKERS] bitfield and gcc

2012-02-10 Thread Gaetano Mendola
I wonder if somewhere in Postgres source "we" are relying on the GCC "correct behaviour" regarding the read-modify-write of bitfield in structures. Take a read at this https://lwn.net/Articles/478657/ sorry if this was already mentioned. Regards Gaetano Mendola -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mail