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
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 |