Re: [HACKERS] spinlock->pthread_mutex : real world results

2012-08-06 Thread Nils Goroll
Robert, 1. How much we're paying for this in the uncontended case? Using glibc, we have the overhead of an additional library function call, which we could eliminate by pulling in the code from glibc/nptl or a source of other proven reference code. The pgbench results I had posted before

Re: [HACKERS] spinlock->pthread_mutex : real world results

2012-08-06 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 08:54:11AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > 2. Should we be modifying our spinlock implementation on Linux to use > futexes rather than pulling pthreads into the mix? > > Anyone have data on the first point, or opinions on the second one? I'm not sure whether pthreads is such a

Re: [HACKERS] spinlock->pthread_mutex : real world results

2012-08-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Nils Goroll wrote: > meanwhile we're using the patch in production (again, this is 9.1.3) and > after running it under full load for one week I believe it is pretty safe to > say that replacing the spinlock code with pthread_mutexes on Linux (which > basically are a