Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded

From: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded
Date: 2023-06-08 14:33:26
Message-ID: CAM-w4HMvXmjz=6r7Yf0yxHX-mzy60DPqoVB8K1b7COEBJKiZLg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 7 Jun 2023 at 18:09, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Having the same memory mapping between threads makes allows the
> hardware to share the TLB (on x86 via process context identifiers), which
> isn't realistically possible with different processes.

As a matter of historical interest Solaris actually did implement this
across different processes. It was called by the somewhat unfortunate
name "Intimate Shared Memory". I don't think Linux ever implemented
anything like it but I'm not sure.

I think this was not so much about cache hit rate but about just sheer
wasted memory in page mappings. So I guess hugepages more or less
target the same issues. But I find it interesting that they were
already running into issues like this 20 years ago -- presumably those
issues have only grown.

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-06-08 14:35:26 Re: Error in calculating length of encoded base64 string
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2023-06-08 14:31:05 Re: Named Prepared statement problems and possible solutions