From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>,
        Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>,
        Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>,
        pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org,
        Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>
Subject: Re: LogwrtResult contended spinlock
In-reply-to: <202407011454.hni6ldpc3hoa@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <202407011454.hni6ldpc3hoa@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
	message dated "Mon, 01 Jul 2024 16:54:51 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2741227.1719845958.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2024 10:59:18 -0400
Message-ID: <2741228.1719845958@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2741228.1719845958%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> Maybe we can do something like this,

> +#if MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF >= 8
>  	uint64		currval;

This should probably be testing the alignment of int64 specifically,
rather than assuming that MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF applies to it.  At least
historically, there have been platforms where MAXIMUM_ALIGNOF is
determined by float quantities and integer quantities are different.

			regards, tom lane