| From: | Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)endpoint(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation |
| Date: | 2011-10-10 21:55:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20111010215510.GH7608@csail.mit.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 04:10:18PM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Did you ever see much contention on
> SerializablePredicateLockListLock, or was it just
> SerializableXactHashLock? I think the former might be able to use
> the non-blocking techniques, but I fear the main issue is with the
> latter, which seems like a harder problem.
No, not that I recall -- if SerializablePredicateLockListLock was on
the list of contended locks, it was pretty far down.
SerializableXactHashLock was the main bottleneck, and
SerializableXactFinishedListLock was a lesser but still significant
one.
Dan
--
Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-10-10 22:13:03 | Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-10-10 21:37:32 | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |