Re: SSI non-serializable UPDATE performance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dan Ports
Subject Re: SSI non-serializable UPDATE performance
Date
Msg-id 20110429072356.GF1432@csail.mit.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SSI non-serializable UPDATE performance  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: SSI non-serializable UPDATE performance  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 06:45:54PM +0200, Robert Haas wrote:
> Yeah, I think Dan's notes about memory ordering would be good to include.

I left it out initially because I didn't want to make things more
confusing. As far as memory ordering is concerned, this is the same
story as anything else that uses lwlocks: the spinlock memory barrier
prevents memory accesses from being reordered before the lock is
acquired. The only unusual thing here is that the lock in question
isn't the one that protects the variable we're reading.

But I'm OK with adding a comment if you think it helps. Patch attached.

Dan

--
Dan R. K. Ports              MIT CSAIL                http://drkp.net/

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: What would AggrefExprState nodes' args contain?
Next
From: Michael Meskes
Date:
Subject: Re: unknown conversion %m