Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm not necessarily saying that any of these particular
> things are what we want to do, just throwing out the idea that we
> may want a variety of lock types that are similar to lightweight
> locks but with subtly different behavior, yet with common
> infrastructure for error handling and wait queue management.
The locking in the clog area is pretty funky. I bet we could craft
a special flavor of FlexLock to make that cleaner. And I would be
surprised if some creative thinking didn't yield a far better FL
scheme for SSI than we can manage with existing LW locks.
Your description makes sense to me, and your numbers prove the value
of the concept. Whether there's anything in the implementation I
would quibble about will take some review time.
-Kevin