Re: Design notes for BufMgrLock rewrite

From: Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Design notes for BufMgrLock rewrite
Date: 2005-02-14 08:45:22
Message-ID: mjqhdkfil7h.fsf@drones.CS.Berkeley.EDU
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

Tom> and changing the buf_table hash table. The only common
Tom> operation that needs exclusive lock is reading in a page that
Tom> was not in shared buffers already, which will require at
Tom> least a kernel call and usually a wait for I/O, so it will be
Tom> slow anyway.

Why not a separate lock per bucket chain in the hash table in addition
to the system-wide LWLock ? It's not so much that such an operation will be
slow anyway but that such a slow operation will unnecessarily block
other operations.

--
Pip-pip
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Huxton 2005-02-14 08:47:30 Re: Dealing with network-dead clients
Previous Message John Hansen 2005-02-14 08:32:15 Schema name of function