From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> |
Cc: | Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |
Date: | 2004-10-24 14:39:35 |
Message-ID: | 8438.1098628775@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> writes:
> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Seems to me the overhead of any such scheme would swamp the savings from
>> avoiding kernel/userspace copies ...
> Well, one really can't know without testing, but memory copies are
> extremely expensive if they go outside of the cache.
Sure, but what about all the copying from write queue to page?
>> the locking issues alone would be painful.
> I don't see why they would be any more painful than the current locking
> issues.
Because there are more locks --- the write queue data structure will
need to be locked separately from the page. (Even with a separate write
queue per page, there will need to be a shared data structure that
allows you to allocate and find write queues, and that thing will be a
subject of contention. See BufMgrLock, which is not held while actively
twiddling the contents of pages, but is a serious cause of contention
anyway.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-24 14:46:59 | Re: Daylight saving time |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-24 14:30:09 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #1290: Default value and ALTER...TYPE |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rod Dutton | 2004-10-24 18:13:23 | Queries slow using stored procedures |
Previous Message | Curt Sampson | 2004-10-24 05:46:16 | Re: First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some |