Re: Optimize LISTEN/NOTIFY

From: "Joel Jacobson" <joel(at)compiler(dot)org>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Optimize LISTEN/NOTIFY
Date: 2025-07-15 20:56:57
Message-ID: e396ecf3-4227-4918-b9ff-e9568dcebcf0@app.fastmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 15, 2025, at 09:20, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2025, at 01:18, Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Joel Jacobson" <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> writes:
>>> The attached proof-of-concept patch proposes a straightforward
>>> optimization for the single-listener case. It introduces a shared-memory
>>> hash table mapping (dboid, channelname) to the ProcNumber of a single
>>> listener.
>>
>> What does that do to the cost and parallelizability of LISTEN/UNLISTEN?
>
> Good point. The previous patch would effectively force all LISTEN/UNLISTEN
> to be serialized, which would at least hurt parallelizability.
>
> New benchmark confirm this hypothesis.
>
> New patch attached that combines two complementary approaches, that together
> seems to scale well for both common-channel and unique-channel scenarios:

Thanks to the FreeBSD animal failing, I see I made a shared memory blunder.
New squashed patch attached.

/Joel

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Subject-Optimize-LISTEN-NOTIFY-signaling-for-scalabi-v3.patch application/octet-stream 28.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jelte Fennema-Nio 2025-07-15 21:04:02 Re: Tags in the commitfest app: How to use them and what tags to add?
Previous Message Mircea Cadariu 2025-07-15 20:50:51 Re: Saving stack space in nbtree's _bt_first function