X-Original-To: pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5515E11F671B for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:25:57 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 67447-10 for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:25:46 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A6CA11F64D3 for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:25:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k3U0OxXW010193; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:24:59 -0400 (EDT) To: Bruce Momjian cc: Theo Schlossnagle , josh.berkus@sun.com, robert.lor@sun.com, PostgreSQL-patches Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #2401: spinlocks not available on amd64 In-reply-to: <200604300016.k3U0GGu13388@candle.pha.pa.us> References: <200604300016.k3U0GGu13388@candle.pha.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian message dated "Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:16:16 -0400" Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:24:59 -0400 Message-ID: <10192.1146356699@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200604/259 X-Sequence-Number: 19531 Bruce Momjian writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> In short, it ain't broken and we don't need to fix it. > Agreed. Should the new Solaris ASM code be modified? No, I have no objection to the new code for Solaris. I just don't want to go off changing TAS macros for the sake of change. regards, tom lane