Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Performance TODO items

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Performance TODO items
Date: 2001-07-30 19:24:01
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> New TODO entries are:
> 	* Add queue of backends waiting for spinlock

I already see:

* Create spinlock sleepers queue so everyone doesn't wake up at once

BTW, I agree with Vadim's opinion that we should add a new type of lock
(intermediate between spinlocks and lockmanager locks) rather than try
to add new semantics onto spinlocks.  For example, it'd be very nice to
distinguish read-only and read-write access in this new kind of lock,
but we can't expect spinlocks to be able to do that.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-07-30 19:29:12
Subject: Re: Performance TODO items
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-07-30 19:00:22
Subject: Re: SIGCHLD handler in Postgres C function.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group