Tarantool development patches archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
To: Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3] wal: introduce limits on simultaneous writes
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 00:46:38 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210301214638.GA240944@starling> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <893bd890-42ce-da21-0f2f-598b2b4f6d9b@tarantool.org>

* Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org> [21/03/01 22:19]:
> 25.02.2021 16:05, Konstantin Osipov пишет:
> > * Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org> [21/02/24 22:39]:
> 
> Hi! Thanks for the review!
> 
> > 
> > Looks like a simple counting semaphore. I don't see why it has
> > to be specific to class journal, more like part of lib/core.
> > 
> > https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/thread/counting_semaphore
> 
> Not completely. It has 2 limits instead of 1, size and len,
> and the limits are 'soft', meaning the resource is free at the
> moment we wake the waiters up but it may be occupied again once
> the waiters actually wake up.

For problem 1, use two semaphores, if you need two limits. For
problem 2, I don't see any value in doing it this way. Do you?

> Some fibers put to execution before
> the waken ones may have exhausted the limit, but we don't care
> about that.

Then they don't take the semaphore?

> IMO this looks quite specialised. And there wouldn't be much use
> of such a primitive in lib/core.

There is inherent value to solve the problem using standard
primitives. Non-standard primitives should be justified over
standard ones, not vice versa.


-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-01 21:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-24 19:35 Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-24 19:40 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-25 13:05 ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-26  0:57   ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-26  7:18     ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-26 20:23       ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-26 21:20         ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-26 22:44           ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-02-27 13:27             ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-01 19:15   ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-01 21:46     ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches [this message]
2021-02-26  0:56 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-01 19:08   ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-01 22:05     ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-02 17:51       ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-03 20:59         ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-09 15:10           ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-09 19:49 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-10  8:18   ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-12 17:10     ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-13 19:14       ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-15 23:42       ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-16  6:45         ` Konstantin Osipov via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-16 20:27           ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-16 10:19         ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-16 20:48           ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-17 12:14             ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-17 21:02           ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-19 11:32             ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-03-19 15:36 ` Kirill Yukhin via Tarantool-patches

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210301214638.GA240944@starling \
    --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
    --cc=kostja.osipov@gmail.com \
    --cc=sergepetrenko@tarantool.org \
    --cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
    --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3] wal: introduce limits on simultaneous writes' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox