Re: Xlogprefetcher: Use atomic add for increment counter
| От | Ranier Vilela |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Xlogprefetcher: Use atomic add for increment counter |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAEudQAqY17xcE9+hF8gG4TaD67_PjU1B6xp2zPbHFgTMS5qHmA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Xlogprefetcher: Use atomic add for increment counter (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Em sex., 7 de nov. de 2025 às 11:59, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> escreveu:
On 2025-11-07 11:52:37 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Em sex., 7 de nov. de 2025 às 11:41, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
> escreveu:
> > On 2025-11-07 11:28:06 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > > Use pg_atomic_fetch_add_u64 to replace pg_atomic_read_u64 and
> > > pg_atomic_write_u64 calls.
> > >
> > > This simplifies the logic and this increases the likelihood that the
> > > operation will be successful.
> >
> > How does it do so? As the assertions indicate, this can only be run from a
> > single process.
> >
> Can I rephrase that?
>
> That simplifies the logic a bit.
Maybe simpler, but also vastly slower than before. An atomic increment is
maybe two orders of magnitude more expensive than an unlocked read & write.
Seriously, I didn't know.
It's best to withdraw the patch then.
Thanks for clarifying this.
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: