Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem

> > > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > > > OK, so now we know that while the new lock code handles the select(1)
> > > > problem better, we also know that on AIX the old select(1) code wasn't
> > > > as bad as we thought.
> > >
> > > It still seems that the select() blocking method should be a loser.
> >
> > No question the new locking code is better. It just frustrates me we
> > can't get something to show that.
>
> Even though I haven't completed controlled benchmarks yet, 7.2b4 was using
> all of my CPU time, whereas a patched version is using around half of CPU
> time, all in user space.
>
> I think not pissing away all our time in the scheduler is a big
> improvement!

Yes, the new patch is clearly better than 7.2b4. We are really hoping
to see the patched version beat 7.1.

--
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