Re: spinlock contention - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Florian Pflug
Subject Re: spinlock contention
Date
Msg-id 2C8B62FB-9527-4605-9349-B9FBEEA6C88C@phlo.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: spinlock contention  (Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Jul8, 2011, at 22:27 , Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> On 07/08/2011 04:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> writes:
>>> Patch attached.
>>
>>> Beware that it needs at least GCC 4.1, otherwise it'll use a per-partition
>>> spin lock instead of "locked xadd" to increment the shared counters.
>>
>> That's already sufficient reason to reject the patch.  Not everyone
>> uses gcc, let alone very recent versions of gcc.
>
> hmm - 4.1.0 was released in february 2006, which will be much older than
> even the 5 year support policy we have on pg when 9.2 will be released,
> not sure how much it will matter if we don't support as specific
> optimization on a gcc that old..

Still, it's not really hard to support older Versions, at least on
x86 and x86-64. All it takes is some inline assembly. I just don't
want to put effort into this until we know whether or not the whole
approach is worthwhile or not.

Should someone want to test this patch, but can't because of the GCC
version restriction, please speak up.

best regards,
Florian Pflug



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner
Date:
Subject: Re: spinlock contention
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: blog post on ancient history