Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1Jcc=1o=Sc+QFt6K_6ROB13q-AXxGo9zmjSYbuBgGAcVw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On 30 June 2015 at 04:21, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>>
>> Now, I would like to briefly explain how allow-one-waker idea has
>> helped to improve the patch as not every body here was present
>> in that Un-conference.
>
>
> The same idea applies for marking commits in clog, for which I have been sitting on a patch for a month or so and will post now I'm done travelling.
>

Sure and I think we might want to try something similar even
for XLogFlush where we use LWLockAcquireOrWait for
WALWriteLock, not sure how it will workout in that case as
I/O is involved, but I think it is worth trying.


With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: LWLock deadlock and gdb advice
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: drop/truncate table sucks for large values of shared buffers