On 2012-01-03 04:44, Robert Haas wrote:
On read-only workloads, you get spinlock contention, because everyone
who wants a snapshot has to take the LWLock mutex to increment the
shared lock count and again (just a moment later) to decrement it.
Does the LWLock protect anything but the shared lock count? If not
then the usually quickest manipulation is along the lines of:
loop: lwarx r5,0,r3 #load and reserve
add r0,r4,r5 #increment word
stwcx. r0,0,r3 #store new value if still reserved
bne- loop #loop if lost reservation
(per IBM's software ref manual,
https://www-01.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/852569B20050FF778525699600719DF2
)
The same sort of thing generally holds on other instruction-sets also.
Also, heavy-contention locks should be placed in cache lines away from other
data (to avoid thrashing the data cache lines when processors are fighting
over the lock cache lines).
--
Jeremy
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
