> Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net> writes:
> > One trick that may help is calling sched_yield(2) on a lock miss,
> > it's a POSIX call and quite new so you'd need a 'configure' test
> > for it.
> The author of the current s_lock code seems to have thought that
> select() with a zero delay would do the equivalent of sched_yield().
> I'm not sure if that's true on very many kernels, if indeed any...
> I doubt we could buy much by depending on sched_yield(); if you want
> to assume POSIX facilities, ISTM you might as well go for user-space
> semaphores and forget the whole TAS mechanism.
Another issue is that sched_yield brings in the pthreads library/hooks
on some OS's, which we certainly want to avoid.
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Oliver Elphick||Date: 2001-01-02 07:59:26|
|Subject: Re: Ignored PostgreSQL SET command |
|Previous:||From: Karel Zak||Date: 2001-01-02 07:58:07|
|Subject: Re: Using Threads?|