From: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Lockless queue of waiters in LWLock |
Date: | 2024-01-26 14:53:20 |
Message-ID: | CALDaNm2vk_NkwtNdUZNHi9wcfOb9xTBcTCVGdtXCgiPgKgzzGg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 at 07:28, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Nov 2022 at 00:24, Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, hackers!
> > In the measurements above in the thread, I've been using LIFO wake
> > queue in a primary lockless patch (and it was attached as the previous
> > versions of a patch) and an "inverted wake queue" (in faсt FIFO) as
> > the alternative benchmarking option. I think using the latter is more
> > fair and natural and provided they show no difference in the speed,
> > I'd make the main patch using it (attached as v6). No other changes
> > from v5, though.
>
> There has not been much interest on this as the thread has been idle
> for more than a year now. I'm not sure if we should take it forward or
> not. I would prefer to close this in the current commitfest unless
> someone wants to take it further.
I have returned this patch in commitfest as nobody had shown any
interest in pursuing it. Feel free to add a new entry when someone
wants to work on this more actively.
Regards,
Vignesh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | reid.thompson | 2024-01-26 14:54:12 | Re: Remove unused fields in ReorderBufferTupleBuf |
Previous Message | vignesh C | 2024-01-26 14:45:52 | Re: PoC: prefetching index leaf pages (for inserts) |