Re: spinlocks on HP-UX

From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: spinlocks on HP-UX
Date: 2011-09-06 14:11:01
Message-ID: 20110906.231101.820372177321459974.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> That would be great. What I've been using as a test case is pgbench
> -S -c $NUM_CPU_CORES -j $NUM_CPU_CORES with scale factor 100 and
> shared_buffers=8GB.
>
> I think what you'd want to compare is the performance of unpatched
> master, vs. the performance with this line added to s_lock.h for your
> architecture:
>
> #define TAS_SPIN(lock) (*(lock) ? 1 : TAS(lock))
>
> We've now added that line for ia64 (the line is present in two
> different places in the file, one for GCC and the other for HP's
> compiler). So the question is whether we need it for any other
> architectures.

Ok. Let me talk to IBM guys...
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Devrim GÜNDÜZ 2011-09-06 14:25:24 Re: Alpha 1 for 9.2
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2011-09-06 14:06:45 Re: Alpha 1 for 9.2