RE: Performance TODO items

From: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>
To: "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Performance TODO items
Date: 2001-07-30 17:12:22
Message-ID: 3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E320166F9@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> New TODO entries are:
>
> * Order duplicate index entries by tid

In other words - add tid to index key: very old idea.

> * Add queue of backends waiting for spinlock

We shouldn't mix two different approaches for different
kinds of short-time internal locks - in one cases we need in
light lmgr (when we're going to keep lock long enough, eg for IO)
and in another cases we'd better to proceed with POSIX' mutex-es
or semaphores instead of spinlocks. Queueing backends waiting
for spinlock sounds like nonsense - how are you going to protect
such queue? With spinlocks? -:)

Vadim

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-07-30 17:15:40 Re: Performance TODO items
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-07-30 17:04:11 Re: Revised Patch to allow multiple table locks in "Unison"