From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Ashkil Dighin <ashkildighin76@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: LwLockRelease performance
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 17:19:39 -0500
Message-ID: <2225685.1638483579@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH6zzqCqZGqwDBWQqHb=XSVMyRBHBE+bh5sVnrQe-UE0uabwtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH6zzqCqZGqwDBWQqHb=XSVMyRBHBE+bh5sVnrQe-UE0uabwtg@mail.gmail.com>
Ashkil Dighin <ashkildighin76@gmail.com> writes:
> The performance bottleneck in LWLockRelease()method goes through an array
> one by one to see which lock was released with O(N). As soon as the lock is
> found it performs an array to remove the lock.
Typically, such locks are released in LIFO order. Do you have any
actual evidence of a performance problem here?
regards, tom lane
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: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, ashkildighin76@gmail.com, pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: LwLockRelease performance
In-Reply-To: <2225685.1638483579@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox