Re: Change BgWriterCommLock to spinlock

From: Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Change BgWriterCommLock to spinlock
Date: 2006-01-08 22:57:51
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.58.0601081753190.3054@eon.cs
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Why is this a good idea?
>

"In spirit of incremental improvement":
(1) The spinlock itself are light weight than the LWLock here and we can
reduce the lock contention a little bit in AbsorbFsyncRequests();
(2) Don't need the CRITICAL SECTION in AbsorbFsyncRequests() any more;

Regards,
Qingqing

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-01-08 23:22:22 Re: Change BgWriterCommLock to spinlock
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2006-01-08 22:37:21 Re: [HACKERS] Inconsistent syntax in GRANT