Tom Lane wrote: > Jan Wieck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> That's irrelevant to the problem, though. Unless the ARC code uses data > >> structures that are more amenable to localized locking than the old > >> global buffer freelist. (Jan?) > > > the strategy itself does no locking at all. Like the old LRU code it > > simply assumes that the buffer manager holds the lock during calls. > > Okay, I suspected as much but wasn't sure. > > Manfred's numbers definitely say that we need to find a way to break > down the BufMgrLock into multiple finer-grain locks. We already have > all those per-buffer LWLocks, but I don't see how to apply those to > the problem of managing the global lookup and replacement datastructures. > > Anyone see an attack path here?
Should we have one lock per hash bucket rather than one for the entire hash? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
