| From: | Sokolov Yura <funny(dot)falcon(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Fix performance of generic atomics |
| Date: | 2017-09-06 13:42:29 |
| Message-ID: | 4bf455658fd88c0334128465eb7236d4@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-09-06 16:36, Tom Lane wrote:
> Sokolov Yura <funny(dot)falcon(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
>> On 2017-09-06 15:56, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The point I'm trying to make is that if tweaking generic.h improves
>>> performance then it's an indicator of missed cases in the
>>> less-generic
>>> atomics code, and the latter is where our attention should be
>>> focused.
>>> I think basically all of the improvement Sokolov got was from
>>> upgrading
>>> the coverage of generic-gcc.h.
>
>> Not exactly. I've checked, that new version of generic
>> pg_atomic_fetch_or_u32
>> loop also gives improvement.
>
> But once you put in the generic-gcc version, that's not reached
> anymore.
>
Yes, you're right.
But I think, generic version still should be "fixed".
If generic version is not reached on any platform, then why it is kept?
If it is reached somewhere, then it should be improved.
--
Sokolov Yura aka funny_falcon
Postgres Professional: https://postgrespro.ru
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2017-09-06 13:42:49 | Is anything preventing us from allowing write to foreign tables from standby? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-06 13:38:35 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add psql variables showing server version and psql version. |