Re: LWLock granular partition lock memory layout - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: LWLock granular partition lock memory layout
Date
Msg-id asaVvxCLAu0t372f@nathan
Whole thread
In response to LWLock granular partition lock memory layout  (Alexandre Felipe <o.alexandre.felipe@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: LWLock granular partition lock memory layout
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 06, 2026 at 08:44:53AM +0100, Alexandre Felipe wrote:
> I argue that having S partitions is better in several different ways.
> 
> a. Concurrency of LW_EXCLUSIVE
> b. Reduced contention on LWLockWaitListLock
> c. Reduced CAS iterations in LWLockAtttemptLock
> d. Reduced waits (that implies wait list access and sleeping)
> 
> I included a (pointless) benchmark result.

Your argument would be greatly improved by showing (with numbers) what
sorts of benefits this provides in realistic workloads.  I briefly looked
at benchmark.txt, but I couldn't quite tell what it was meant to show, and
you characterized it as pointless, anyway.

-- 
nathan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL segment file descriptor leak on read errors can PANIC the server
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel autovacuum: DROP DATABASE WITH (FORCE) fails on the parallel workers