| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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. |