On 2016-04-05 17:36:49 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > Could the reason be that we're increasing concurrency for LWLock state > atomic variable by placing queue spinlock there?
Don't think so, it's the same cache-line either way. > But I wonder why this could happen during "pgbench -S", because it doesn't > seem to have high traffic of exclusive LWLocks. Yea, that confuses me too. I suspect there's some mis-aligned datastructures somewhere. It's hard to investigate such things without access to hardware. (FWIW, I'm working on getting pinunpin committed) Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
