public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
To: Jan Wieck <[email protected]>
Cc: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <[email protected]>
Cc: Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu) <[email protected]>
Cc: Aleksander Alekseev <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: shveta malik <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Commit Timestamp and LSN Inversion issue
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 12:45:35 -0500
Message-ID: <xniptxjmqddyofohc7d5o376ygjoz4dkdtgpcqddznu6pw4xtl@ww2kyxgrr3na> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <xhcapr7lur35itqrbk4qdqn7rzfaqr3g6dvyxzfx6jeyknhvbv@h3wkgixuuuon>
<CAA4eK1+ZdL=sC4sdUOQz+X9=7Z8Uxhkd0VqwcB9rgzXjvu=6yA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA4eK1KQ6H4u5=_5Xq44HhX3RFXW4HW-z0F4T4J1nf2xVCo04w@mail.gmail.com>
<CAA4eK1L6Vpf9EmL2bpfD3kdvM6_2XQqwJ9GY6uY-hgcot76cqA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<lyydpy6xly7gefcswkimur733wcbke4bdjwjedvluyo2ebfdr7@xz5k4mbjgivm>
<[email protected]>
<wpitjnzyno7pmhnaudsehw5v6lw644cz52wx4qqd2wvfazlxgq@gsogjmyhn3xw>
<[email protected]>
Hi,
On 2024-11-12 11:40:39 -0500, Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 11/12/24 10:34, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I have working code - pretty ugly at this state, but mostly needs a fair bit
> > of elbow grease not divine inspiration... It's not a trivial change, but
> > entirely doable.
> >
> > The short summary of how it works is that it uses a single 64bit atomic that
> > is internally subdivided into a ringbuffer position in N high bits and an
> > offset from a base LSN in the remaining bits. The insertion sequence is
> >
> > ...
> >
> > This leaves you with a single xadd to contended cacheline as the contention
> > point (scales far better than cmpxchg and far far better than
> > cmpxchg16b). There's a bit of contention for the ringbuffer[].oldpos being set
> > and read, but it's only by two backends, not all of them.
>
> That sounds rather promising.
>
> Would it be reasonable to have both implementations available at least at
> compile time, if not at runtime?
No, not reasonably.
> Is it possible that we need to do that anyway for some time or are those
> atomic operations available on all supported CPU architectures?
We have a fallback atomics implementation for the uncommon architectures
without 64bit atomics.
> In any case, thanks for the input. Looks like in the long run we need to
> come up with a different way to solve the inversion problem.
IMO there's absolutely no way the changes proposed in this thread so far
should get merged.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
view thread (33+ 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], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Commit Timestamp and LSN Inversion issue
In-Reply-To: <xniptxjmqddyofohc7d5o376ygjoz4dkdtgpcqddznu6pw4xtl@ww2kyxgrr3na>
* 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