Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets

From: Nils Goroll <slink(at)schokola(dot)de>
To: Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets
Date: 2015-06-10 15:16:39
Message-ID: 557854D7.7090302@schokola.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10/06/15 17:12, Jan Wieck wrote:
> for (...)
> {
> s_lock();
> // do something with a global variable
> s_unlock();
> }

OK, I understand now, thank you. I am not sure if this test case is appropriate
for the critical sections in postgres (if it was, we'd not have the problem we
are discussion).

Nils

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-06-10 15:17:15 Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets
Previous Message Nils Goroll 2015-06-10 15:12:56 Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets