Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-performance-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1msuQg-0007pg-RW
	for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2021 22:19:50 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-performance-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1msuQZ-0001cd-PH
	for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2021 22:19:43 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1msuQZ-0001cO-Eq
	for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2021 22:19:43 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1msuQX-0000iU-79
	for pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 02 Dec 2021 22:19:42 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 1B2MJddI2225686;
	Thu, 2 Dec 2021 17:19:39 -0500
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Ashkil Dighin <ashkildighin76@gmail.com>
cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: LwLockRelease performance
In-reply-to: 
 <CAH6zzqCqZGqwDBWQqHb=XSVMyRBHBE+bh5sVnrQe-UE0uabwtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH6zzqCqZGqwDBWQqHb=XSVMyRBHBE+bh5sVnrQe-UE0uabwtg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Ashkil Dighin <ashkildighin76@gmail.com>
	message dated "Wed, 01 Dec 2021 19:56:11 +0530"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2225684.1638483579.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 17:19:39 -0500
Message-ID: <2225685.1638483579@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-performance.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-performance>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2225685.1638483579%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

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