Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches

From: Ildus Kurbangaliev <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "andres(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
Date: 2015-09-15 16:44:19
Message-ID: 20150915194419.42cc6d6a@iw
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 06:32:22 -0400
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev
> <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> > Yes, that is because I tried to go with current convention working
> > with shmem in Postgres (there are one function that returns the
> > size and others that initialize that memory). But I like your
> > suggestion about API functions, in that case number of tranches and
> > locks will be known during the initialization.
>
> I also want to leave the door open to tranches that are registered
> after initialization. At that point, it's too late to put a tranche
> in shared memory, but you can still use DSM.
>

We can hold some extra space in LWLockTrancheArray, add some
function for unregistering a tranche, and reuse free items in
LWLockTrancheId later.

----
Ildus Kurbangaliev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-09-15 16:47:40 Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
Previous Message YUriy Zhuravlev 2015-09-15 16:43:28 Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics