Re: SAN performance mystery

From: Tim Allen <tim(at)proximity(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Jeff Trout <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SAN performance mystery
Date: 2006-06-19 06:12:07
Message-ID: 44964037.6060605@proximity.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Jeff Trout wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2006, at 5:11 AM, Tim Allen wrote:
>> One curious thing is that some postgres backends seem to spend an
>> inordinate amount of time in uninterruptible iowait state. I found a
>> posting to this list from December 2004 from someone who reported
>> that very same thing. For example, bringing down postgres on the
>> customer box requires kill -9, because there are invariably one or
>> two processes so deeply uninterruptible as to not respond to a
>> politer signal. That indicates something not quite right, doesn't it?
>
> Sounds like there could be a driver/array/kernel bug there that is
> kicking the performance down the tube.
> If it was PG's fault it wouldn't be stuck uninterruptable.

That's what I thought. I've advised the customer to upgrade their kernel
drivers, and to preferably upgrade their kernel as well. We'll see if
they accept the advice :-|.

Tim

--
-----------------------------------------------
Tim Allen tim(at)proximity(dot)com(dot)au
Proximity Pty Ltd http://www.proximity.com.au/

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tim Allen 2006-06-19 10:09:47 Re: SAN performance mystery
Previous Message Arjen van der Meijden 2006-06-18 09:17:54 Re: [HACKERS] Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL