Re: WAL Insertion Lock Improvements
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-07-11T00:20:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 08:00:00AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 5:05 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: >> @Andres: Were there any extra tests you wanted to be run for more >> input? > > @Andres Freund please let us know your thoughts. Err, ping. It seems like this thread is waiting on input from you, Andres? -- Michael
Commits
-
Optimize pg_atomic_exchange_u32 and pg_atomic_exchange_u64.
- 64b1fb5f0326 17.0 cited
-
Document more assumptions of LWLock variable changes with WAL inserts
- 66d86d4201b3 17.0 landed
-
Optimize WAL insertion lock acquisition and release with some atomics
- 71e4cc6b8ec6 17.0 landed
-
Avoid the use of a separate spinlock to protect a LWLock's wait queue.
- 008608b9d510 9.6.0 cited