Re: fork/exec patch - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: fork/exec patch
Date
Msg-id 20772.1071583293@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: fork/exec patch  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
List pgsql-patches
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> My next question would have been to ask whether switching to a
> spinlock here will be a performance problem. In looking at the code,
> it seems we only hold the ShmemIndexLock for a long time (hundreds of
> instructions & multiple system calls) while bootstrapping the shmem
> index hash table itself. Otherwise, the lock is acquired and released
> quickly, and even then it is only done during backend initialization,
> so there shouldn't be much contention for it. Is this analysis
> correct?

Yes, at least that was the theory I was working from when I suggested
Claudio do it this way ...

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Claudio Natoli
Date:
Subject: Re: fork/exec patch
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: YA Doc patch