On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 13:49 +0000, Matthew Wakeling wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
> > I thought about that.. Except without putting a restriction a huge queue will cause lot of time spent in
manipulatingthe lock
> > list every time. One more thing will be to maintain two list shared and exclusive and round robin through them for
everytime you
> > access the list so manipulation is low.. But the best thing is to allow flexibility to change the algorithm since
someworkloads
> > may work fine with one and others will NOT. The flexibility then allows to tinker for those already reaching the
limits.
>
> Yeah, having two separate queues is the obvious way of doing this. It
> would make most operations really trivial. Just wake everything in the
> shared queue at once, and you can throw it away wholesale and allocate a
> new queue. It avoids a whole lot of queue manipulation.
Yes, that sounds good.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support