Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Khandekar
Subject Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM.
Date
Msg-id CAJ3gD9fip8f71ZS1FcU96Sq+_0jrfBnXCEet1ECdxzXHcAvb_w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM.  (Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 at 02:55, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 6:58 AM Krunal Bauskar <krunalbauskar@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Let me know what do you think about this analysis and any specific direction that we should consider to help move
forward.
>
> BTW, it would be also nice to benchmark my lwlock patch on the
> Kunpeng.  I'm very optimistic about this patch, but it wouldn't be
> fair to completely throw it away.  It still might be useful for
> LSE-disabled builds.

Coincidentally I was also looking at some hotspot locations around
LWLockAcquire() and LWLockAttempt() for read-only work-loads on both
arm64 and x86, and had narrowed down to the place where
pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32() is called. So it's likely we are
working on the same hotspot area. When I get a chance, I do plan to
look at your patch while I myself am trying to see if we can do some
optimizations. Although, this is unrelated to the optimization of this
mail thread, so this will need a different mail thread.



-- 
Thanks,
-Amit Khandekar
Huawei Technologies



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS
Next
From: "Hou, Zhijie"
Date:
Subject: RE: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS