Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Joshua Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Date: 2011-06-07T20:11:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: >> Moving on from that, I have proposed other solutions. Koichi, Jignesh >> and and then Robert have shown measurements of the huge contention in >> this area of our software. Robert's patch addresses the problems, as >> do Koichi's and my latest patch. I would like to see us do >> *something* about these problems for 9.1. Not all of them are risky or >> time consuming. > > In the first place, all of these issues predate 9.1 by years. They are > not regressions or new bugs, and they have not suddenly gotten more > urgent. In the second place, I haven't seen any proposals in the area > that appear low risk. I seriously doubt that I would consider *any* > meaningful change in the locking area to be low risk. That's a shame. We'll fix it in 9.2 then. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services