Re: [HACKERS] Re: sched_yield() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From The Hermit Hacker
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: sched_yield()
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSF.3.96.980322014347.324T-100000@thelab.hub.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: sched_yield()  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 21 Mar 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > Secondly, the select() backoff patch I am working on starts out with a zero
> > timeout and backs off incrementally by increasing the timeout value on
> > subsequent iterations. The idea is to break up convoys and avoid big piles of
> > processes pounding on a spinlock. This cannot be done with sched_yield().
>
> Hard to beat the backoff argument.  I vote we only use select().

    I haven't heard any compelling arguments so far as to why
sched_yield() is better then select(), so I tend to vote the same way...

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] psql nested queries with 2000+ records
Next
From: Tom
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: sched_yield()