Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

From: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
Date: 2016-03-30 10:16:04
Message-ID: CAPpHfdtz_3zK4yDdetLkrTx_D7nD0cPYtAhfdWPD_eE2q=MYVg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> On 2016-03-30 07:13:16 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:43 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
> wrote:
> >
> > > My gut feeling is that we should do both 1) and 2).
> > >
> > > Dilip, could you test performance of reducing ppc's spinlock to 1 byte?
> > > Cross-compiling suggest that doing so "just works". I.e. replace the
> > > #if defined(__ppc__) typedef from an int to a char.
> > >
> >
> > I set that, but after that it hangs, even Initdb hangs..
>
> Yea, as Tom pointed out that's not going to work. I'll try to write a
> patch for approach 1).
>

Great! Do you need any improvements for pinunpin-cas-7.patch from me?

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sridhar N Bamandlapally 2016-03-30 10:32:27 Re: pg_largeobject
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2016-03-30 10:14:55 Re: WIP: Access method extendability