| From: | Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Manfred Spraul <manfred(at)colorfullife(dot)com> |
| Cc: | neilc(at)samurai(dot)com, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: futex results with dbt-3 |
| Date: | 2004-10-20 17:10:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20041020101001.A13359@osdl.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 09:39:33AM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Neil wrote:
>
> >. In any case, the "futex patch"
> >uses the Linux 2.6 futex API to implement PostgreSQL spinlocks.
> >
> Has anyone tried to replace the whole lwlock implementation with
> pthread_rwlock? At least for Linux with recent glibcs, pthread_rwlock is
> implemented with futexes, i.e. we would get a fast lock handling without
> os specific hacks. Perhaps other os contain user space pthread locks, too.
> Attached is an old patch. I tested it on an uniprocessor system a year
> ago and it didn't provide much difference, but perhaps the scalability
> is better. You'll have to add -lpthread to the library list for linking.
I've heard that simply linking to the pthreads libraries, regardless of
whether you're using them or not creates a significant overhead. Has
anyone tried it for kicks?
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matt Clark | 2004-10-20 17:12:38 | Re: OS desicion |
| Previous Message | Manfred Spraul | 2004-10-20 16:51:49 | Re: futex results with dbt-3 |