Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
Date
Msg-id 200201040446.g044k4a21125@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem  ("Jeffrey W. Baker" <jwbaker@acm.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > OK, so now we know that while the new lock code handles the select(1)
> > problem better, we also know that on AIX the old select(1) code wasn't
> > as bad as we thought.
> 
> It still seems that the select() blocking method should be a loser.

No question the new locking code is better.  It just frustrates me we
can't get something to show that.

--  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: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: Is there any performance penalty using --with-ssl?
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: shmctl portability problem