Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA29087
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:31:08 -0400 (EDT)
-Received: from hub.org (hub.org [216.126.84.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.6 $) with ESMTP id KAA27535 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:19:47 -0400 (EDT)
+Received: from hub.org (hub.org [216.126.84.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.7 $) with ESMTP id KAA27535 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:19:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA30328;
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 10:12:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from renoir.op.net (root@renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id VAA28130
for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:25:26 -0400 (EDT)
-Received: from hub.org (hub.org [216.126.84.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.6 $) with ESMTP id VAA10512 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:15:28 -0400 (EDT)
+Received: from hub.org (hub.org [216.126.84.1]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.7 $) with ESMTP id VAA10512 for <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:15:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost)
by hub.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA50745;
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 21:07:23 -0400 (EDT)
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
+From pgsql-hackers-owner+M11649@postgresql.org Wed Aug 1 15:22:46 2001
+Return-path: <pgsql-hackers-owner+M11649@postgresql.org>
+Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
+ by candle.pha.pa.us (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f71JMjN09768
+ for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:22:45 -0400 (EDT)
+Received: from postgresql.org.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
+ by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with SMTP id f71JMUf62338;
+ Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:22:30 -0400 (EDT)
+ (envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M11649@postgresql.org)
+Received: from sectorbase2.sectorbase.com (sectorbase2.sectorbase.com [63.88.121.62] (may be forged))
+ by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with SMTP id f71J4df57086
+ for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:04:40 -0400 (EDT)
+ (envelope-from vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM)
+Received: by sectorbase2.sectorbase.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
+ id <PG1LSSPZ>; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:04:31 -0700
+Message-ID: <3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E32016705@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com>
+From: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
+To: "'pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org'" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
+Subject: [HACKERS] Using POSIX mutex-es
+Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:04:24 -0700
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
+Content-Type: text/plain;
+ charset="koi8-r"
+Precedence: bulk
+Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
+Status: OR
+
+1. Just changed
+ TAS(lock) to pthread_mutex_trylock(lock)
+ S_LOCK(lock) to pthread_mutex_lock(lock)
+ S_UNLOCK(lock) to pthread_mutex_unlock(lock)
+(and S_INIT_LOCK to share mutex-es between processes).
+
+2. pgbench was initialized with scale 10.
+ SUN WS 10 (512Mb), Solaris 2.6 (I'm unable to test on E4500 -:()
+ -B 16384, wal_files 8, wal_buffers 256,
+ checkpoint_segments 64, checkpoint_timeout 3600
+ 50 clients x 100 transactions
+ (after initialization DB dir was saved and before each test
+ copyed back and vacuum-ed).
+
+3. No difference.
+ Mutex version maybe 0.5-1 % faster (eg: 37.264238 tps vs 37.083339 tps).
+
+So - no gain, but no performance loss "from using pthread library"
+(I've also run tests with 1 client), at least on Solaris.
+
+And so - looks like we can use POSIX mutex-es and conditional variables
+(not semaphores; man pthread_cond_wait) and should implement light lmgr,
+probably with priority locking.
+
+Vadim
+
+---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
+TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
+ (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
+