1 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Rusty Russell	11ab43084b	tdb: workaround starvation problem in locking entire database. ... 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>	2010-08-14 02:31:22 +09:30