Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200112291937.fBTJbFG28196@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> It would seem, therefore, that lwlock.c's behavior of immediately > granting the lock to released waiters is not such a good idea after all. > Perhaps we should release waiters but NOT grant them the lock; when they > get to run, they have to loop back, try to get the lock, and possibly go > back to sleep if they fail. This apparent waste of cycles is actually > beneficial because it saves context swaps overall. Another question: Is there a way to release buffer locks without aquiring the master lock? -- 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: