> where the number of padding locks is determined by how many lock
> structures fit within a 128 byte cache line.
>
> This isn't exactly elegant coding, but it provides a useful improvement
> on an 8-way SMP box when run on 8.0 base. OK, lets be brutal: this looks
> pretty darn stupid. But it does
>
> Do other people reach the same conclusions?
>
> Can we make a list of those architectures for which 8.1 is known to
> perform reasonably well, with reasonable SMP scalability? I suggest that
> we record this list somewhere in the release notes, but with a comment
> to say we run on other archit
> Emil Briggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I was testing the spinlock patches that Tom Lane posted last month
> > on a quad opteron system running Suse 9.2 for x86_64.
>
> Exactly which patch is this, and against what base version of Postgres?
> Also, what'
I was testing the spinlock patches that Tom Lane posted last month
on a quad opteron system running Suse 9.2 for x86_64. The test sql and
database was from a real application of ours and I was interested in seeing
what effect the patches might have. The database is entirely RAM resident and
noth
