Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYjpNKdHDFUtJLAMna-O5LGuTDnanHFAOT5=hN_VAuW2Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 6:21 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-07-01 11:19:40 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> What "tricks" are being used??
>>
>> Please explain why taking 2 locks is bad here, yet works fine elsewhere.
>
> I didn't say anything about 'bad'. It's more complicated than one
> lock. Suddenly you have to care about lock ordering and such. The
> algorithms for ensuring correctness gets more complicated.

Taking two locks might also be more expensive than just taking one.  I
suppose benchmarking will reveal whether there is an issue there.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory leak fixes for pg_dump, pg_dumpall, initdb and pg_upgrade
Next
From: Robbie Harwood
Date:
Subject: [PATCH v1] GSSAPI encryption support