| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends |
| Date: | 2025-09-04 15:44:00 |
| Message-ID: | aLmzwC2dRbqk14y6@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 02:01:14PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> Committed.
I'm having some regrets about the changes to RequestNamedLWLockTranche().
Specifically, when it is first called, it immediately allocates an array
big enough to hold 256 requests (~17 KB), whereas it used to only allocate
space for 16 requests (~1 KB) and resize as needed. Furthermore, the
MAX_NAMED_TRANCHES check isn't actually needed because InitializeLWLocks()
will do the same check via its calls to LWLockNewTrancheId() for all the
named tranche requests.
--
nathan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v1-0001-Revert-some-recent-changes-to-RequestNamedLWLockT.patch | text/plain | 1.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alena Rybakina | 2025-09-04 15:49:20 | Re: Vacuum statistics |
| Previous Message | jian he | 2025-09-04 15:20:42 | Re: NOT NULL NOT ENFORCED |