public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
To: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Postgres hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrey Borodin <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: injection_points: Switch wait/wakeup to use atomics rather than latches
Date: Thu, 28 May 2026 08:40:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+TgmoamSXmT7uMXBw6c3YJgSSz6dYdpMsJf47jwaPH9kVbmyA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 10:43 PM Michael Paquier <[email protected]> wrote:
> While looking at the test proposed on the thread about the ProcKill(),
> I have been reminded about the fact that relying on latches and a
> condition variable for the wait and the wakeups has its limits:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aheVjCHmcbXBtiy0%40paquier.xyz
After reading this email, the linked-to email, and the commit message
for the patch, I still don't have a clear understanding of what this
is intended to fix. It seems like it's going to make the
responsiveness worse. In general, we want to replace escalating wait
loops with things that wake up instantly at the right time, and this
is going in the opposite direction.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
view thread (21+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: injection_points: Switch wait/wakeup to use atomics rather than latches
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoamSXmT7uMXBw6c3YJgSSz6dYdpMsJf47jwaPH9kVbmyA@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox