Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches

From: Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>
Subject: Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches
Date: 2005-09-13 16:21:45
Message-ID: m2wtll9bvq.fsf@Douglas-McNaughts-Powerbook.local
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:

> Tom, All:
>
>> It seems to me what you've found is an outright bug in the linux scheduler.
>> Perhaps posting it to linux-kernel would be worthwhile.
>
> For people using this on Linux 2.6, which scheduler are you using? Deadline
> is the recommended one for databases, and does offer significant (+5-8%)
> benefits in some heavy-contention environments, at least in OSDL tests.

I thought 'deadline' was an I/O scheduler, not a CPU scheduler?

-Doug

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Douglas McNaught 2005-09-13 16:24:04 Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-09-13 16:17:06 Re: bug #1702: nested composite types in plpgsql