| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look? |
| Date: | 2007-07-20 11:46:07 |
| Message-ID: | 871wf39u2o.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>
>> That's an interesting thought. Let me check lock counts and see if this is
>> possibly the case.
>
> AFAIK you'd get hard failures, not slowdowns, if you ran out of lock
> space entirely
I assume you've checked the server logs and are sure that you aren't in fact
getting errors. I could, for example, envision a situation where a fraction of
the transactions are getting some error and those transactions are therefore
not being counted against the txn/s result.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dan Harris | 2007-07-20 15:43:50 | Simple query showing 270 hours of CPU time |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2007-07-20 04:58:35 | 8.2 -> 8.3 performance numbers |