Re: Final Thoughts for 8.3 on LWLocking and Scalability
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Final Thoughts for 8.3 on LWLocking and Scalability |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1189538104.4281.503.camel@ebony.site обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Final Thoughts for 8.3 on LWLocking and Scalability ("Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 19:32 +0200, Florian G. Pflug wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 10:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > >>> 1. The ProcArrayLock is acquired Exclusive-ly by only one > >>> remaining operation: XidCacheRemoveRunningXids(). Reducing things > >>> to that level is brilliant work, Florian and Tom. > >> It would be brilliant if it were true, but it isn't. Better look > >> again. > > > > On the more detailed explanation, I say "in normal operation". > > > > My analytical notes attached to the original post show ProcArrayLock > > is acquired exclusively during backend start, exit and while making a > > prepared (twophase) commit. So yes, it is locked Exclusively in > > other places, but they happen rarely and they actually add/remove > > procs from the array, so its unlikely anything can change there > > anyhow. > > Well, and during normal during COMMIT and ABORT, which might happen > rather frequently ;-) Agreed, that part of my assessment was not accurate... -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: