On 03/12/2025 02:47, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2025-11-25 11:54:00 -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
Thanks a lot for that detailed review!  A few questions and comments, before I
try to address the comments in the next version.

Here's that new new version, with the following changes

- Some more micro-optimizations, most importantly adding a commit that doesn't
   initialize the delay in LockBufHdr() unless needed. With those I don't see a
   consistent slowdown anymore (slight speedup on one workstation, slight
   slowdown on another, in an absurdly adverse workload)

+1

I'm comparing the patched LockBufHdr() with LWLockWaitListLock(), which does pretty much the same thing, and LWLockWaitListLock() already did the initialization of the delay that way. But there are some small differences:

- LockBufHdr() uses unlikely() in the initial attempt, LWLockWaitListLock() does not - LWLockWaitListLock() uses pg_atomic_read_u32() after spinning, LockBufHdr() retries directly with pg_atomic_fetch_or_u32().

Are there reasons for the differences, or is it just that they were developed separately and ended up looking slightly different?

- Heikki



Reply via email to