Re: LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines

From: Sokolov Yura <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines
Date: 2017-08-30 15:50:05
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2017-08-30 16:24, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
>> It doesn't seems to make sense to consider this patch unless we get
>> access
>> to suitable Power machine to reproduce benefits.
>> This is why I'm going to mark this patch "Returned with feedback".
>> Once we would get access to the appropriate machine, I will resubmit
>> this
>> patch.
> What about hydra (that 60-core POWER7 machine we have community
> access to)?
> regards, tom lane

Anyway, I encourage to consider first another LWLock patch:
It positively affects performance on any platform (I've tested it
on Power as well).

And I have prototype of further adaptation of that patch for POWER
platform (ie using inline assembly) (not published yet).

Sokolov Yura
Postgres Professional:
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-08-30 16:11:06 Re: expanding inheritance in partition bound order
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-08-30 15:35:27 Re: Hash Functions