Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, gmaxwell(at)gmail(dot)com, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>
Subject: Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches
Date: 2005-09-16 19:36:29
Message-ID: 20050916193629.GZ6026@ns.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Greg Stark (gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu) wrote:
> However I was under the impression that 2.6 had moved beyond that problem.
> It would be very interesting to know if 2.6 still suffers from this.

The tests on the em64t at my place were using 2.6.12. I had thought 2.6
was better about this too, but I don't have another explanation for it.
CONFIG_SMT was enabled, etc..

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-09-16 19:41:11 Re: [HACKERS] statement_timeout logging
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-09-16 19:33:08 Re: statement_timeout logging