Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jeffrey W(dot) Baker" <jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
Date: 2001-12-29 19:46:18
Message-ID: 19560.1009655178@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-odbc

Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> writes:
> How hard will it be to try this out?

It's a pretty minor rearrangement of the logic in lwlock.c, I think.
Working on it now.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-12-29 20:07:47 Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-12-29 19:45:28 Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem

Browse pgsql-odbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-12-29 20:07:47 Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-12-29 19:45:28 Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem