| From: | Любен Каравелов <karavelov(at)mail(dot)bg> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Use gcc built-in atomic inc/dec in lock.c |
| Date: | 2012-12-14 21:00:10 |
| Message-ID: | a5ee45c0e8144cc31169c9fcf88d9ef3.mailbg@mail.bg |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
----- Цитат от Mikko Tiihonen (mikko(dot)tiihonen(at)nitorcreations(dot)com), на 14.12.2012 в 17:33 -----
> On 12/13/2012 12:19 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On 12 December 2012 22:11, Mikko Tiihonen
>> <mikko(dot)tiihonen(at)nitorcreations(dot)com> wrote:
>>> noticed a "XXX: It might be worth considering using an atomic fetch-and-add
>>> instruction here, on architectures where that is supported." in lock.c
>>>
>>> Here is my first try at using it.
>>
>> That's interesting, but I have to wonder if there is any evidence that
>> this *is* actually helpful to performance.
>
> One of my open questions listed in the original email was request for help on
> creating a test case that exercise the code path enough so that it any
> improvements can be measured.
>
Running pgbench on 16+ cores/threads could stress locking primitives. From my experience even benchmarks run on 8 core systems should tell the difference.
--
Luben Karavelov
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2012-12-14 21:15:55 | Parser Cruft in gram.y |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-12-14 20:56:10 | Re: Use of systable_beginscan_ordered in event trigger patch |