Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Lock Wait Statistics (next commitfest)

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Lock Wait Statistics (next commitfest)
Date: 2010-02-27 03:15:21
Message-ID: 201002270315.o1R3FLt23583@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
What happened to this patch?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Where I work they make extensive use of Postgresql. One of the things 
> they typically want to know about are lock waits. Out of the box in 
> there is not much in the way of tracking for such, particularly in older 
> versions. The view pg_stats is fine for stuff happening *now*, but 
> typically I find I'm being asked about something that happened last 
> night...
> 
> Now for those platforms with dtrace there is a lock wait probe, useful - 
> but not for those of us on Linux! There is the conf option to log lock 
> waits > deadlock timeout (8.3 onwards), and this is great, but I 
> wondered if having something like this available as part of the stats 
> module would be useful.
> 
> So here is my initial attempt at this, at this point merely to spark 
> discussion (attached patch)
> 
> I have followed some of the ideas from the function execution stats, but 
> locks required some special treatment.
> 
> - new parameter track_locks (maybe should be track_lock_waits?)
> - new hash locks attached to stats dbentry
> - several new stat*lock c functions
> - new view pg_stat_lock_waits
> - new attributes for pg_stat_database
> 
> This version has simply exposed the locktag structure in the view along 
> with corresponding #waits and wait time. This should probably get 
> reformed to look a little more like pg_locks. I figured this is easily 
> doable along with the no doubt many changes coming from revew comments.
> 
> Also I did not do any clever amalgamation of transaction lock waits - 
> there is probably gonna be a lot of those and keeping the detail is 
> unlikely to be useful. It would be easy to collect them all together in 
> one transaction entry.
> 
> regards
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 

[ application/x-gzip is not supported, skipping... ]

> 
> -- 
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
  PG East:  http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-02-27 03:18:25
Subject: Re: Testing of parallel restore with current snapshot
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-02-27 03:12:38
Subject: Re: plpgsql: numeric assignment to an integer variable errors out

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group