Re: Cpu usage 100% on slave. s_lock problem.

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Дмитрий Дегтярёв <degtyaryov(at)gmail(dot)com>, postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Cpu usage 100% on slave. s_lock problem.
Date: 2013-09-17 13:43:48
Message-ID: 20130917134348.GG5452@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On 2013-09-17 08:40:23 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > If you ever get into the situation I mistakenly referred to again, I'd
> > strongly suggest recompling postgres with -fno-omit-frame-pointer. That
> > makes hierarchical profiles actually useful which can help tremendously
> > with diagnosing issues like this...
>
> We may get an opportunity to do that. I'm curious enough about the
> THP compaction issues that Kevin mentioned to to maybe consider
> cranking buffers again. If I do that, it will be with strict
> instructions to the site operators to catch a profile before taking
> further action.

The THP issues should be very clearly diagnosable because a good part of
the time will be spent in the kernel. Lots of spinlocking there, but the
function names are easily discernible from pg's code.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2013-09-17 16:37:35 Re: [PERFORM] encouraging index-only scans
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2013-09-17 13:40:23 Re: Cpu usage 100% on slave. s_lock problem.