Re: simplify register_dirty_segment()

From: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: simplify register_dirty_segment()
Date: 2005-04-26 06:03:17
Message-ID: d4klmq$2imb$1@news.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes
> It would be a reasonable
> bet for a kernel designer to assume that fsync() is generally going to
> have to wait for some I/O and so a bit of CPU overhead isn't really
> going to matter.

Reasonable.

>
> Adjusting such a global refcount would require global locks, which is
> just what you were hoping to avoid :-(

I don't want to avoid the global locks but to alleviate it :-( Think the
frequency of open()/close() will be much less than write(). Also the shmem
space required. On further thought, I agree that this is unneccessary if for
BgWriterCommLock reason - because currently BufMgrLock doesn't bother us too
much, which is more intensively used, this lock is just nothing.

Regards,
Qingqing

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Wheeler 2005-04-26 06:05:56 Re: DO INSTEAD and conditional rules
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-04-26 06:00:52 Re: DO INSTEAD and conditional rules