OK, either you have to own the issue or I have to add something to the TODO list.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neil Conway wrote: > On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 21:51 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Neil, where are we on this? Should we add comments? Add a TODO? A patch? > > I'm not sure what the right resolution is. As I said, I don't think it's > wise to apply a patch that could have a significant impact on > performance without (a) testing its performance effect and/or (b) having > any evidence that the problem it addresses actually effects anyone in > the real world. I'll try to run some benchmarks when I get a chance. > > I wrote up most of a patch to implement the "wake up all shared wakers > on LWLockRelease()" behavior to see how that would change performance, > but the patch has a subtle bug in it that I can't seem to find (I've > attached it -- comments welcome). > > Certainly if we decide to leave things as they are I think we ought to > document why the behavior is intentional, but I don't think we have > enough data to make that decision yet. > > -Neil > [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster -- 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 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html