rdelaage
/
postgresql
mirror of https://git.postgresql.org/git/postgresql.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Oops, only wanted datetime.c changes in there. lock stuff reversed out.

This commit is contained in:
Bruce Momjian 2001-12-29 21:30:32 +00:00
parent 9e7b9c6f54
commit 6f901b6f5a
1 changed files with 58 additions and 63 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

121
src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c
View File

@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
* Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
*
* IDENTIFICATION
* $Header: /cvsroot/pgsql/src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c,v 1.6 2001/12/29 21:28:18 momjian Exp $
* $Header: /cvsroot/pgsql/src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c,v 1.7 2001/12/29 21:30:32 momjian Exp $
*
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*/
@ -195,8 +195,7 @@ void
LWLockAcquire(LWLockId lockid, LWLockMode mode)
{
volatile LWLock *lock = LWLockArray + lockid;
PROC *proc = MyProc;
int extraWaits = 0;
bool mustwait;
PRINT_LWDEBUG("LWLockAcquire", lockid, lock);
@ -207,57 +206,43 @@ LWLockAcquire(LWLockId lockid, LWLockMode mode)
*/
HOLD_INTERRUPTS();
/*
* Loop here to try to acquire lock after each time we are signaled
* by LWLockRelease.
*
* NOTE: it might seem better to have LWLockRelease actually grant us
* the lock, rather than retrying and possibly having to go back to
* sleep. But in practice that is no good because it means a process
* swap for every lock acquisition when two or more processes are
* contending for the same lock. Since LWLocks are normally used to
* protect not-very-long sections of computation, a process needs to
* be able to acquire and release the same lock many times during a
* single process dispatch cycle, even in the presence of contention.
* The efficiency of being able to do that outweighs the inefficiency of
* sometimes wasting a dispatch cycle because the lock is not free when a
* released waiter gets to run. See pgsql-hackers archives for 29-Dec-01.
*/
for (;;)
/* Acquire mutex. Time spent holding mutex should be short! */
SpinLockAcquire_NoHoldoff(&lock->mutex);
/* If I can get the lock, do so quickly. */
if (mode == LW_EXCLUSIVE)
{
bool mustwait;
/* Acquire mutex. Time spent holding mutex should be short! */
SpinLockAcquire_NoHoldoff(&lock->mutex);
/* If I can get the lock, do so quickly. */
if (mode == LW_EXCLUSIVE)
if (lock->exclusive == 0 && lock->shared == 0)
{
if (lock->exclusive == 0 && lock->shared == 0)
{
lock->exclusive++;
mustwait = false;
}
else
mustwait = true;
lock->exclusive++;
mustwait = false;
}
else
mustwait = true;
}
else
{
/*
* If there is someone waiting (presumably for exclusive access),
* queue up behind him even though I could get the lock. This
* prevents a stream of read locks from starving a writer.
*/
if (lock->exclusive == 0 && lock->head == NULL)
{
if (lock->exclusive == 0)
{
lock->shared++;
mustwait = false;
}
else
mustwait = true;
lock->shared++;
mustwait = false;
}
else
mustwait = true;
}
if (!mustwait)
break; /* got the lock */
if (mustwait)
{
/* Add myself to wait queue */
PROC *proc = MyProc;
int extraWaits = 0;
/*
* Add myself to wait queue.
*
* If we don't have a PROC structure, there's no way to wait. This
* should never occur, since MyProc should only be null during
* shared memory initialization.
@ -282,9 +267,9 @@ LWLockAcquire(LWLockId lockid, LWLockMode mode)
*
* Since we share the process wait semaphore with the regular lock
* manager and ProcWaitForSignal, and we may need to acquire an
* LWLock while one of those is pending, it is possible that we get
* awakened for a reason other than being signaled by LWLockRelease.
* If so, loop back and wait again. Once we've gotten the LWLock,
* LWLock while one of those is pending, it is possible that we
* get awakened for a reason other than being granted the LWLock.
* If so, loop back and wait again. Once we've gotten the lock,
* re-increment the sema by the number of additional signals
* received, so that the lock manager or signal manager will see
* the received signal when it next waits.
@ -302,21 +287,23 @@ LWLockAcquire(LWLockId lockid, LWLockMode mode)
LOG_LWDEBUG("LWLockAcquire", lockid, "awakened");
/* Now loop back and try to acquire lock again. */
/*
* The awakener already updated the lock struct's state, so we
* don't need to do anything more to it. Just need to fix the
* semaphore count.
*/
while (extraWaits-- > 0)
IpcSemaphoreUnlock(proc->sem.semId, proc->sem.semNum);
}
else
{
/* Got the lock without waiting */
SpinLockRelease_NoHoldoff(&lock->mutex);
}
/* We are done updating shared state of the lock itself. */
SpinLockRelease_NoHoldoff(&lock->mutex);
/* Add lock to list of locks held by this backend */
Assert(num_held_lwlocks < MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS);
held_lwlocks[num_held_lwlocks++] = lockid;
/*
* Fix the process wait semaphore's count for any absorbed wakeups.
*/
while (extraWaits-- > 0)
IpcSemaphoreUnlock(proc->sem.semId, proc->sem.semNum);
}
/*
@ -357,7 +344,12 @@ LWLockConditionalAcquire(LWLockId lockid, LWLockMode mode)
}
else
{
if (lock->exclusive == 0)
/*
* If there is someone waiting (presumably for exclusive access),
* queue up behind him even though I could get the lock. This
* prevents a stream of read locks from starving a writer.
*/
if (lock->exclusive == 0 && lock->head == NULL)
{
lock->shared++;
mustwait = false;
@ -435,17 +427,20 @@ LWLockRelease(LWLockId lockid)
if (lock->exclusive == 0 && lock->shared == 0)
{
/*
* Remove the to-be-awakened PROCs from the queue. If the
* front waiter wants exclusive lock, awaken him only.
* Otherwise awaken as many waiters as want shared access.
* Remove the to-be-awakened PROCs from the queue, and update
* the lock state to show them as holding the lock.
*/
proc = head;
if (!proc->lwExclusive)
if (proc->lwExclusive)
lock->exclusive++;
else
{
lock->shared++;
while (proc->lwWaitLink != NULL &&
!proc->lwWaitLink->lwExclusive)
{
proc = proc->lwWaitLink;
lock->shared++;
}
}
/* proc is now the last PROC to be released */