| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention |
| Date: | 2015-07-30 18:32:44 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ4hTQuX0r-w5f-cVn+9uWfpMQ8tM5Wz7JaBkeJY+va-g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2015-07-29 12:54:59 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I would try to avoid changing lwlock.c. It's pretty easy when so
>> doing to create mechanisms that work now but make further upgrades to
>> the general lwlock mechanism difficult. I'd like to avoid that.
>
> I'm massively doubtful that re-implementing parts of lwlock.c is the
> better outcome. Then you have two different infrastructures you need to
> improve over time.
That is also true, but I don't think we're going to be duplicating
anything from lwlock.c in this case.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-07-30 18:47:09 | Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-07-30 18:32:03 | Re: Using quicksort and a merge step to significantly improve on tuplesort's single run "external sort" |