Re: Concurrent free-lock

From: Pailloncy Jean-Gerard <jg(at)rilk(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Concurrent free-lock
Date: 2005-01-26 11:22:20
Message-ID: 8B01194C-6F8C-11D9-9590-000A95DE2550@rilk.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> This is a very important thread. Many thanks to Jean-Gerard for
> bringing
> the community's attention to this.
Thanks Simon.

I was working during my PhD on some parallel algorithm. The computer
was a 32-grid processor in 1995. In this architecture we need to do the
lock on the data, with minimum contention. We can not do a lock on the
code path with mutex, because there was 32 different boards and a sync
across the system was not doable. The data was a mesh graph that
represent the segmentation of some satellite image.

When I see this paper with some good test, I remember this old days and
think that if we have some generic algorithm for type like hash, tree,
list with "lock-free parallel read" property it will be a very good
win.
I think about an other paper I read on the PostgreSQL site about an
algorithm with a global ordering of transaction design for multi-master
database. I do not remember the url.

The third thing that come to my mind, is the next generation of
slony/pgcluster.

Cordialement,
Jean-Gérard Pailloncy

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bojidar Mihajlov 2005-01-26 11:26:25 Re: RQ: Prepared statements used by multiple connections
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2005-01-26 11:19:36 Re: Patent issues and 8.1