Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention
Date: 2015-08-04 15:33:48
Message-ID: 20150804153348.GA5452@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-08-04 11:29:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 1. I got rid of all of the typecasts. You're supposed to treat
> pg_atomic_u32 as a magic data type that is only manipulated via the
> primitives provided, not just cast back and forth between that and
> u32.

Absolutely. Otherwise no fallbacks can work.

> 2. I got rid of the memory barriers. System calls are full barriers,
> and so are compare-and-exchange operations. Between those two facts,
> we should be fine without these.

Actually by far not all system calls are full barriers?

Regards,

Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-08-04 15:42:37 Re: brin index vacuum versus transaction snapshots
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-08-04 15:29:39 Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention