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

Re: lock contention on parallel COPY ?

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: lock contention on parallel COPY ?
Date: 2008-09-26 16:13:44
Message-ID: 48DD0A38.7000402@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
>   
>> samples  %        symbol name
>> 1933314  21.8884  LWLockAcquire
>> 1677808  18.9957  XLogInsert
>> 848227    9.6034  LWLockRelease
>> 414179    4.6892  DoCopy
>> 332633    3.7660  CopyReadLine
>> 266580    3.0181  UnpinBuffer
>> 221693    2.5099  heap_formtuple
>>     
>
> I suppose Andrew didn't yet put in the hack to avoid WAL logging
> during the COPY commands.  The LWLockAcquires are presumably
> blocking on WALInsertLock, given that XLogInsert is also right
> up there ...
>
> 			
>   


Yes I did. That's what the --truncate-before-load switch does (or should 
do).

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-09-26 16:15:57
Subject: Re: lock contention on parallel COPY ?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-09-26 16:10:24
Subject: Re: lock contention on parallel COPY ?

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