| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Tristan Partin <tristan(at)partin(dot)io>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [multithreading] extension compatibility |
| Date: | 2024-06-06 01:59:42 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ4GiB8Nx3+B0+3Pnq2JSQWPafnw0Hb9Fb8GFRRdOw0-w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 9:50 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Depending on the architecture / ABI / compiler options it's often not
> meaningfully more expensive to access a thread local variable than a "normal"
> variable.
>
> I think these days it's e.g. more expensive on x86-64 windows, but not
> linux. On arm the overhead of TLS is more noticeable, across platforms,
> afaict.
I mean, to me, this still sounds like we want multithreading to be a
build-time option.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2024-06-06 02:09:36 | Re: [multithreading] extension compatibility |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-06-06 01:50:32 | Re: [multithreading] extension compatibility |