Re: Help with duration of statement: EXECUTE <unnamed> [PREPARE: COMMIT]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com>
Cc: Eric Comeau <ecomeau(at)signiant(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Help with duration of statement: EXECUTE <unnamed> [PREPARE: COMMIT]
Date: 2010-10-18 15:02:15
Message-ID: 19782.1287414135@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> My guess would be overstressed disk subsystem. A COMMIT doesn't require
>> much except fsync'ing the commit WAL record down to disk ...

> Doesn't the "commit" statement also release all the locks held by the
> transaction?

Yeah, and there's a nontrivial amount of other cleanup too, but it all
amounts to just changes in in-memory data structures. I don't see that
taking five seconds, especially not if commits of similar transactions
usually take much less than that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Kupershmidt 2010-10-18 15:52:45 Re: how to get the total number of records in report
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2010-10-18 14:44:53 Re: No hash join across partitioned tables?