Re: spinlock contention

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: spinlock contention
Date: 2011-07-08 14:21:41
Message-ID: 26418.1310134901@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> Patch attached.

> Beware that it needs at least GCC 4.1, otherwise it'll use a per-partition
> spin lock instead of "locked xadd" to increment the shared counters.

That's already sufficient reason to reject the patch. Not everyone
uses gcc, let alone very recent versions of gcc.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-07-08 14:29:03 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Adjust OLDSERXID_MAX_PAGE based on BLCKSZ.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-07-08 14:18:05 Re: WIP: Fast GiST index build