Dave Cramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> diff -c -r1.16 s_lock.c
> *** backend/storage/lmgr/s_lock.c     8 Aug 2003 21:42:00 -0000       1.16
> --- backend/storage/lmgr/s_lock.c     21 Apr 2004 20:27:34 -0000
> ***************
> *** 76,82 ****
>        * The select() delays are measured in centiseconds (0.01 sec) because 10
>        * msec is a common resolution limit at the OS level.
>        */
> ! #define SPINS_PER_DELAY             100
>   #define NUM_DELAYS                  1000
>   #define MIN_DELAY_CSEC              1
>   #define MAX_DELAY_CSEC              100
> --- 76,82 ----
>        * The select() delays are measured in centiseconds (0.01 sec) because 10
>        * msec is a common resolution limit at the OS level.
>        */
> ! #define SPINS_PER_DELAY             10
>   #define NUM_DELAYS                  1000
>   #define MIN_DELAY_CSEC              1
>   #define MAX_DELAY_CSEC              100


As far as I can tell, this does reduce the rate of semop's
significantly, but it does so by bringing the overall processing rate
to a crawl :-(.  I see 97% CPU idle time when using this patch.
I believe what is happening is that the select() delay in s_lock.c is
being hit frequently because the spin loop isn't allowed to run long
enough to let the other processor get out of the spinlock.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
    (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])

Reply via email to