| From: | Sven Geisler <sgeisler(at)aeccom(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2006-07-21 14:59:49 |
| Message-ID: | 44C0EBE5.8010508@aeccom.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Hi,
Tom Lane schrieb:
> Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
>> I ran pgbench and fired up a DTrace script using the lwlock probes we've
>> added, and it looks like BufMappingLock is the most contended lock, but
>> CheckpointStartLocks are held for longer duration!
>
> Those numbers look a bit suspicious --- I'd expect to see some of the
> LWLocks being taken in both shared and exclusive modes, but you don't
> show any such cases. You sure your script is counting correctly?
> Also, it'd be interesting to count time spent holding shared lock
> separately from time spent holding exclusive.
Is there a test case which shows the contention for this full cached
tables? It would be nice to have measurable numbers like context
switches and queries per second.
Sven.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-07-21 15:03:05 | Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace |
| Previous Message | korry | 2006-07-21 14:37:08 | Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Lor | 2006-07-21 15:11:58 | Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-07-21 13:56:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL |