|
We saw tdb_lockall() take 71 seconds under heavy load; this is because Linux
(at least) doesn't prevent new small locks being obtained while we're waiting
for a big log.
The workaround is to do divide and conquer using non-blocking chainlocks: if
we get down to a single chain we block. Using a simple test program where
children did "hold lock for 100ms, sleep for 1 second" the time to do
tdb_lockall() dropped signifiantly. There are ln(hashsize) locks taken in
the contended case, but that's slow anyway.
More analysis is given in my blog at http://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=120
This may also help transactions, though in that case it's the initial
read lock which uses this gradual locking routine; the update-to-write-lock
code is separate and still tries to update in one go.
Even though ABI doesn't change, minor version bumped so behavior change
can be easily detected.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
|
