From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Pailloncy Jean-Gerard <jg(at)rilk(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Concurrent free-lock |
Date: | 2005-01-24 15:35:40 |
Message-ID: | 41F515CC.90209@tvi.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Lock free data structures are cool... but not really applicable to
databases. They have a high maintenance overhead, severe complexity,
and will fail when there are many concurrent inserts/deletes to the
structure. I messed with them a year or so ago, and that's what I found
in every implementation.
Pailloncy Jean-Gerard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read recently a paper
> Keir Fraser & Tim Harris, Concurrent Programing without Locks, ACM
> Journal Name, vol V, n° N, M 20YY, Page 1-48
>
> About algorithm to manage structure (exemple about red-black tree,
> skip list) with dead-lock free property, parallel read, etc.
>
> Does this have been studied for PostgreSQL ?
> There is surely some good idea in it.
>
> Cordialement,
> Jean-Gérard Pailloncy
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if
> your
> joining column's datatypes do not matc
> h
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Fetter | 2005-01-24 16:12:49 | Re: Shortcut for defining triggers |
Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2005-01-24 15:28:09 | Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*) |