Re: Is the unfair lwlock behavior intended? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Is the unfair lwlock behavior intended?
Date
Msg-id 20160525181537.35qisp6fdetahriu@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is the unfair lwlock behavior intended?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Is the unfair lwlock behavior intended?  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2016-05-25 14:09:43 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I think this is looking at the problem from the wrong angle.  The OP's
> complaint is pretty fair: a 30-second wait for ProcArrayLock is
> horrendous, and if that's actually something that is happening with
> any significant regularity on well-configured systems, we need to fix
> it somehow.

No disagreement there.


> I don't think we can just say "oh, well,
> sometimes the system becomes totally unresponsive for more than 30
> seconds, but we don't care".  We have to care about that.

I don't think anybody was doing that? The first questions on this thread
were about upgrading and retesting...


Andres



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_bsd_indent - improvements around offsetof and sizeof
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: statistics for shared catalogs not updated when autovacuum is off