| From: | Rural Hunter <ruralhunter(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table |
| Date: | 2014-07-29 00:10:35 |
| Message-ID: | 53D6E67B.1040003@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-performance |
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">在 2014/7/29 1:29, Jeff Janes 写道:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMkU=1ydmpt9XRMxt0sPNnQsXEoF_c7bgp2kHxtDbPNGg5Vj5w(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>If it were waiting on a pg_locks lock, the semop should
be coming from ProcSleep, not from <span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">LWLockAcquire,
shouldn't it?</span></div>
<div><span
style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><font color="#000000" face="arial, sans-serif">I'm
guessing he has a lot of connections, and each
connection is locking each partition in shared mode in
rapid fire, generating spin-lock or cache-line
contention.</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000" face="arial, sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div>Cheers,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jeff</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yes. I have a lot of connections and they maybe coming together and
doing the same update statement without partition key on the
partition table.<br>
</body>
</html>
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| unknown_filename | text/html | 1.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cliff Pratt | 2014-07-29 00:12:53 | Re: I: "ERROR: could not access status of transaction" (after upgrding from 9.3.2 to 9.3.4?) |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2014-07-28 17:29:25 | Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rural Hunter | 2014-07-29 08:21:18 | Re: Very slow planning performance on partition table |
| Previous Message | worthy7 | 2014-07-28 19:55:13 | Re: Full text search with ORDER BY performance issue |