On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Kouhei Kaigai <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote: > Hmm. In my experience, it is often not a productive discussion whether > a feature is niche or commodity. So, let me change the viewpoint. > > We may utilize OS-level locking mechanism here. > > Even though it depends on filesystem implementation under the VFS, > we may use inode->i_mutex lock that shall be acquired during the buffer > copy from user to kernel, at least, on a few major filesystems; ext4, > xfs and btrfs in my research. As well, the modified NVMe SSD driver can > acquire the inode->i_mutex lock during P2P DMA transfer. > > Once we can consider the OS buffer is updated atomically by the lock, > we don't need to worry about corrupted pages, but still needs to pay > attention to the scenario when updated buffer page is moved to GPU. > > In this case, PD_ALL_VISIBLE may give us a hint. GPU side has no MVCC > infrastructure, so I intend to move all-visible pages only. > If someone updates the buffer concurrently, then write out the page > including invisible tuples, PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag shall be cleared because > updated tuples should not be visible to the transaction which issued > P2P DMA. > > Once GPU met a page with !PD_ALL_VISIBLE, it can return an error status > that indicates CPU to retry this page again. In this case, this page is > likely loaded to the shared buffer already, so retry penalty is not so > much. > > I'll try to investigate the implementation in this way. > Please correct me, if I misunderstand something (especially, treatment > of PD_ALL_VISIBLE).
I suppose there's no theoretical reason why the buffer couldn't go from all-visible to not-all-visible and back to all-visible again all during the time you are copying it. Honestly, I think trying to access buffers without going through shared_buffers is likely to be very hard to make correct and probably a loser. Copying the data into shared_buffers and then to the GPU is, doubtless, at least somewhat slower. But I kind of doubt that it's enough slower to make up for all of the problems you're going to have with the approach you've chosen. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers