Horton

Re: lazy vxid locks, v1

Florian G. Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>

View thread
From: Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-06-22T21:43:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Avoid extra system calls to block SIGPIPE if the platform provides either

On Jun12, 2011, at 23:39 , Robert Haas wrote:
> So, the majority (60%) of the excess spinning appears to be due to
> SInvalReadLock.  A good chunk are due to ProcArrayLock (25%).

Hm, sizeof(LWLock) is 24 on X86-64, making sizeof(LWLockPadded) 32.
However, cache lines are 64 bytes large on recent Intel CPUs AFAIK,
so I guess that two adjacent LWLocks currently share one cache line.

Currently, the ProcArrayLock has index 4 while SInvalReadLock has
index 5, so if I'm not mistaken exactly the two locks where you saw
the largest contention on are on the same cache line...

Might make sense to try and see if these numbers change if you
either make LWLockPadded 64bytes or arrange the locks differently...

best regards,
Florian Pflug