Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: LWLockRelease

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LWLockRelease
Date: 2005-02-03 14:03:14
Message-ID: KGEFLMPJFBNNLNOOOPLGIEDMCIAA.simon@2ndquadrant.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> From: Neil Conway [mailto:neilc(at)samurai(dot)com] wrote
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > Setting MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS to this fairly high number doesn't seem to
> > match the optimistic use of the O(N) algorithm.

...

> Perhaps some data on the average value of num_held_locks and
> the number
> of entries we needed to search through to find the right lock
> would help
> verify whether this is indeed a problem.

Yes, I'll measure that and come back on this.

Best Regards, Simon Riggs


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2005-02-03 14:26:16
Subject: Re: LWLock cache line alignment
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2005-02-03 14:00:21
Subject: Re: LWLockRelease

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group