From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info> |
Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, shveta malik <shveta(dot)malik(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Commit Timestamp and LSN Inversion issue |
Date: | 2024-11-12 17:45:35 |
Message-ID: | xniptxjmqddyofohc7d5o376ygjoz4dkdtgpcqddznu6pw4xtl@ww2kyxgrr3na |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2024-11-12 11:40:39 -0500, Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 11/12/24 10:34, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I have working code - pretty ugly at this state, but mostly needs a fair bit
> > of elbow grease not divine inspiration... It's not a trivial change, but
> > entirely doable.
> >
> > The short summary of how it works is that it uses a single 64bit atomic that
> > is internally subdivided into a ringbuffer position in N high bits and an
> > offset from a base LSN in the remaining bits. The insertion sequence is
> >
> > ...
> >
> > This leaves you with a single xadd to contended cacheline as the contention
> > point (scales far better than cmpxchg and far far better than
> > cmpxchg16b). There's a bit of contention for the ringbuffer[].oldpos being set
> > and read, but it's only by two backends, not all of them.
>
> That sounds rather promising.
>
> Would it be reasonable to have both implementations available at least at
> compile time, if not at runtime?
No, not reasonably.
> Is it possible that we need to do that anyway for some time or are those
> atomic operations available on all supported CPU architectures?
We have a fallback atomics implementation for the uncommon architectures
without 64bit atomics.
> In any case, thanks for the input. Looks like in the long run we need to
> come up with a different way to solve the inversion problem.
IMO there's absolutely no way the changes proposed in this thread so far
should get merged.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2024-11-12 19:11:07 | Re: Fix array access (src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c) |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-11-12 17:27:37 | Re: doc: pgevent.dll location |