Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
| От | Andres Freund |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20160114171421.GK10941@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-01-14 12:07:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Do we want to provide a backward compatible API for all this? I'm fine
> > either way.
>
> How would that work?
I'm thinking of something like;
int WaitOnLatchSet(LatchEventSet *set, int wakeEvents, long timeout);
int
WaitLatchOrSocket(volatile Latch *latch, int wakeEvents, pgsocket sock,long timeout)
{ LatchEventSet set;
LatchEventSetInit(&set, latch);
if (sock != PGINVALID_SOCKET) LatchEventSetAddSock(&set, sock);
return WaitOnLatchSet(set, wakeEvents, timeout);
}
I think we'll need to continue having wakeEvents and timeout parameters
for WaitOnLatchSet, we quite frequently want to wait socket
readability/writability, not wait on the socket, or have/not have
timeouts.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: