Subject: Re: ingres and atomicity
To: None <email@example.com>
From: James K. Lowden <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/13/2005 21:07:04
Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <email@example.com>,
> James K. Lowden <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >Back to the future: Ingres is free again. If you google "ingres
> >site:netbsd.org" you get a lot of messages about the group, and some
> >ancient ones about the original RDBMS from Berkeley. You may know CA
> >released it as open source. I thought I'd try my hand at porting it.
> >Since going commercial, Ingres grew threads, about which it seems I'll
> >have to learn.
> >My first real difficulty has to do with "atomic clear". The build
> >requires it:
> > #error : must define an atomic clear
> I think that the best way to make progress is to follow what Linux
> does, and mark it XXX:jkl or something where you need to re-visit it.
Ah, I did that, and the waters got immediately murkier. So I backed off
and decided to *understand* the issues, however hard that might be.
Does the term "atomic clear" have some generally accepted meaning, or is
Do we support, anywhere, the idea of changing a word (4 bytes) of memory
atomically, meaning that no other thread can intervene?