Re: RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/transam ( xact.c xlog.c)
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/transam ( xact.c xlog.c) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200011162002.PAA26639@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/transam ( xact.c xlog.c) (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/transam (
xact.c xlog.c)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> * Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com> [001116 13:46]: > > At 02:13 PM 11/16/00 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > >> I think the default should probably be no delay, and the documentation > > >> on enabling this needs to be clear and obvious (i.e. hard to miss). > > > > > >I just talked to Tom Lane about this. I think a sleep(0) just before > > >the flush would be the best. It would reliquish the cpu slice if > > >another process is ready to run. If no other backend is running, it > > >probably just returns. If there is another one, it gives it a chance to > > >complete. On return from sleep(0), it can check if it still needs to > > >flush. This would tend to bunch up flushers so they flush only once, > > >while not delaying cases where only one backend is running. > > > > This sounds like an interesting approach, yes. > Question: Is sleep(0) guaranteed to at least give up control? > > The way I read my UnixWare 7's man page, it might not, since alarm(0) > just cancels the alarm... Well, it certainly is a kernel call, and most OS's re-evaluate on kernel call return. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: