Re: [HACKERS] Re: sched_yield()

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: dg(at)illustra(dot)com (David Gould)
Cc: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: sched_yield()
Date: 1998-03-22 04:03:41
Message-ID: 199803220403.XAA02710@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Secondly, the select() backoff patch I am working on starts out with a zero
> timeout and backs off incrementally by increasing the timeout value on
> subsequent iterations. The idea is to break up convoys and avoid big piles of
> processes pounding on a spinlock. This cannot be done with sched_yield().

Hard to beat the backoff argument. I vote we only use select().

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Coronach 1998-03-22 04:21:39 Re: [HACKERS] psql nested queries with 2000+ records
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-03-22 04:01:12 Re: sched_yield()