Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-04-17T22:52:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > What I'm not clear on is why you've used a spinlock everywhere when only > weak-memory thang CPUs are a problem. Why not have a weak-memory-protect > macro that does does nada when the hardware already protects us? (i.e. a > spinlock only for the hardware that needs it). Well, we could certainly consider that, if we had enough places where there was a demonstrable benefit from it. I couldn't measure any real slowdown from adding a spinlock in that sinval code, so I didn't propose doing so at the time --- and I'm pretty dubious that this code is sufficiently performance-critical to justify the work, either. regards, tom lane