|
|
|
|
|
|
by sdab
4322 days ago
|
|
|
In theory yes, though thinking in terms of transactions is subtly different from thinking in terms of threading critical sections. Particularly, they differ in how they handle contention. Locks block while transactions abort/fail. Simply retry-ing a transaction is also not a good idea which is why it is currently suggested to fallback on locks [1]. So I assume the suggestion of using it for dbs is because it would be more straight-forward as dbs are already used to transactions. 1. https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2013/06/23/tsx-fallba... |
|
|