Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex
Date: 2016-03-19 13:32:22
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaEJLiUJhK2zKL2wVPwDe2m_v_=D4Lp2GpDrYGpWmUQnQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 12:28 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Won't in theory, without patch as well nentries can overflow after running
> for very long time? I think with patch it is more prone to overflow because
> we start borrowing from other free lists as well.

Uh, I don't think so. Without the patch, there is just one entries
counter and it goes up and down. How would it ever overflow?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-03-19 13:38:38 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Improve memory management for external sorts.
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-03-19 13:29:14 Re: Idle In Transaction Session Timeout, revived