Re: LWLockAcquire with priority - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: LWLockAcquire with priority
Date
Msg-id 29386.1223657264@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to LWLockAcquire with priority  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> This will prevent commits being stalled when we occasionally switch clog
> and multixact pages, plus it also stops commits from being stalled when
> there are heavy writers in progress.

Exactly how would a priority mechanism prevent stalling?  If the lock is
held for a long time, it's held for a long time.

The point of the LWLock mechanism is to be lightweight, so I'm
disinclined to put additional complexity into it without a *really*
good reason.  Making it any slower would cost us in many places.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: 8.4devel out of memory
Next
From: "Jim Cox"
Date:
Subject: Re: TODO item: adding VERBOSE option to CLUSTER [with patch]