From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: System load consideration before spawning parallel workers |
Date: | 2016-07-29 10:48:09 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LRnrChEHWD2trZ605EaKDj4THbT84v1mbccmk0N_s9uA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Haribabu Kommi
<kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> we observed that spawning the specified number of parallel workers for
> every query that satisfies for parallelism is sometimes leading to
> performance drop compared to improvement during the peak system load
> with other processes. Adding more processes to the system is leading
> to more context switches thus it reducing the performance of other SQL
> operations.
>
Have you consider to tune using max_worker_processes, basically I
think even if you have kept the moderate value for
max_parallel_workers_per_gather, the number of processes might
increase if total number allowed is much bigger.
Are the total number of parallel workers more than number of
CPU's/cores in the system? If yes, I think that might be one reason
for seeing performance degradation.
> In order to avoid this problem, how about adding some kind of system
> load consideration into account before spawning the parallel workers?
>
Hook could be a possibility, but not sure how users are going to
decide the number of parallel workers, there might be other backends
as well which can consume resources. I think we might need some form
of throttling w.r.t assignment of parallel workers to avoid system
overload.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2016-07-29 11:15:52 | [Patch] Temporary tables that do not bloat pg_catalog (a.k.a fast temp tables) |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-07-29 07:54:42 | Re: WAL logging problem in 9.4.3? |