Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Certainly there is a lack of ideas as to how to fix it, as you mention > > in (3). This shows to me that the solution lies in one of two areas: a) > > the solution has not yet been considered or b) the solution has already > > been thought of and for whatever reason disregarded. You may be certain > > that the solution lies in a), though I am not. Rejecting ideas quickly > > may simply increase the chances of finding the solution in a b) case. > > However, building a spinlock test harness presupposes that the solution > lies in the spinlock code itself, and not in (say) changing our usage > patterns of it. So I'd throw the "rejecting ideas too quickly" > challenge right back at you. What we need to optimize is the behavior > in the real context of Postgres, not in a test harness.
How do other databases deal with this? I can't imagine we are the only ones. Are we doing something different than them? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (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: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
