Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
Date
Msg-id 200109290341.f8T3fIv02616@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal  (mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > > Save for the fact that the kernel can switch between threads faster then
> > > it can switch processes considering threads share the same address space,
> > > stack, code, etc.  If need be sharing the data between threads is much
> > > easier then sharing between processes.
> > 
> > Just a clarification but because we fork each backend, don't they share
> > the same code space?  Data/stack is still separate.
> 
> In Linux and many modern UNIX programs, you share everything at fork time. The
> data and stack pages are marked "copy on write" which means that if you touch
> it, the processor traps and drops into the memory manager code. A new page is
> created and replaced into your address space where the page, to which you were
> going to write, was.

Yes, very true.  My point was that backends already share code space and
non-modified data space.  It is just modified data and stack that is
non-shared, but then again, they would have to be non-shared in a
threaded backend too.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Lincoln Yeoh
Date:
Subject: Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Glitch in handling of postmaster -o options