Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Andres Freund
Тема Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
Дата
Msg-id 20160405144503.xlv6sjvuzu5e5ppn@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
Ответы Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2016-04-05 17:36:49 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> Could the reason be that we're increasing concurrency for LWLock state
> atomic variable by placing queue spinlock there?

Don't think so, it's the same cache-line either way.

> But I wonder why this could happen during "pgbench -S", because it doesn't
> seem to have high traffic of exclusive LWLocks.

Yea, that confuses me too. I suspect there's some mis-aligned
datastructures somewhere. It's hard to investigate such things without
access to hardware.

(FWIW, I'm working on getting pinunpin committed)

Greetings,

Andres Freund



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2