[HACKERS] HACKERS[PROPOSAL] split ProcArrayLock into multiple parts

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jim Van Fleet
Тема [HACKERS] HACKERS[PROPOSAL] split ProcArrayLock into multiple parts
Дата
Msg-id OFBAB24999.8DB8C8DE-ON86258136.006AEB24-86258136.006B30C8@notes.na.collabserv.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] HACKERS[PROPOSAL] split ProcArrayLock into multipleparts  (Sokolov Yura <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru>)
Re: [HACKERS] HACKERS[PROPOSAL] split ProcArrayLock into multiple parts  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
Hi,

I have been experimenting with splitting  the ProcArrayLock into parts.  That is, to Acquire the ProcArrayLock in shared mode, it is only necessary to acquire one of the parts in shared mode; to acquire the lock in exclusive mode, all of the parts must be acquired in exclusive mode. For those interested, I have attached a design description of the change.

This approach has been quite successful on large systems with the hammerdb benchmark.With a prototype based on 10 master source and running on power8 (model 8335-GCA with 2sockets, 20 core)
 hammerdb  improved by 16%; On intel (Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v4 @ 2.20GHz, 2 socket, 44 core) with 9.6 base and prototype hammerdb improved by 4%. (attached is a set of spreadsheets for power8.

The down side is that on smaller configurations (single socket) where there is less "lock thrashing" in the storage subsystem and there are multiple Lwlocks to take for an exclusive acquire, there is a decided downturn in performance. On  hammerdb, the prototype was 6% worse than the base on a single socket power configuration.

If there is interest in this approach, I will submit a patch.

Jim Van Fleet


Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] shm_toc_lookup API
Следующее
От: Petr Jelinek
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Why does logical replication launcher setapplication_name?