Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VoXHU-0007cR-J8 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 11:39:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VoXHT-0000Jm-Tp for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 11:39:43 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VoXHS-0000Ja-Ms for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 11:39:42 +0000 Received: from mail.anarazel.de ([217.115.131.40]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VoXHP-0005fr-KK for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 11:39:42 +0000 Received: from intern.anarazel.de (p5DDC41B8.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.220.65.184]) (Authenticated sender: andres@anarazel.de) by mail.anarazel.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2CCEC4F0001; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 12:39:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 12:39:38 +0100 From: Andres Freund To: Tom Lane Cc: Robert Haas , Peter Eisentraut , Peter Geoghegan , Pg Hackers , Ants Aasma Subject: Re: better atomics - v0.2 Message-ID: <20131205113938.GC12398@alap2.anarazel.de> References: <20131115200416.GH5489@awork2.anarazel.de> <8392.1384873040@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20131119151646.GD10498@alap2.anarazel.de> <9336.1384875455@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9336.1384875455@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org On 2013-11-19 10:37:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > The only animal we have that doesn't support quiet inlines today is > > HP-UX/ac++, and I think - as in patch 1 in the series - we might be able > > to simply suppress the warning there. > > Or just not worry about it, if it's only a warning? So, my suggestion on that end is that we remove the requirement for quiet inline now and see if it that has any negative consequences on the buildfarm for a week or so. Imo that's a good idea regardless of us relying on inlining support. Does anyone have anything against that plan? If not, I'll prepare a patch. > Or does the warning > mean code bloat (lots of useless copies of the inline function)? After thinking on that for a bit, yes that's a possible consequence, but it's quite possible that it happens in cases where we don't get the warning too, so I don't think that argument has too much bearing as I don't recall a complaint about it. 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