Re: LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines

From: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
To: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines
Date: 2017-03-24 15:11:32
Message-ID: f7e92243-068f-06aa-625f-3468ee8caf2e@pgmasters.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Alexander,

On 3/16/17 1:35 PM, David Steele wrote:
> On 2/21/17 9:54 AM, Bernd Helmle wrote:
>> Am Dienstag, den 14.02.2017, 15:53 +0300 schrieb Alexander Korotkov:
>>> +1
>>> And you could try to use pg_wait_sampling
>>> <https://github.com/postgrespro/pg_wait_sampling> to sampling of wait
>>> events.
>>
>> I've tried this with your example from your blog post[1] and got this:
>>
>> (pgbench scale 1000)
>>
>> pgbench -Mprepared -S -n -c 100 -j 100 -T 300 -P2 pgbench2
>>
>> SELECT-only:
>>
>> SELECT * FROM profile_log ;
>> ts | event_type | event | count
>> ----------------------------+---------------+---------------+-------
>> 2017-02-21 15:21:52.45719 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 8
>> 2017-02-21 15:22:11.19594 | LWLockTranche | lock_manager | 1
>> 2017-02-21 15:22:11.19594 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 24
>> 2017-02-21 15:22:31.220803 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 1
>> 2017-02-21 15:23:01.255969 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 1
>> 2017-02-21 15:23:11.272254 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 2
>> 2017-02-21 15:23:41.313069 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 1
>> 2017-02-21 15:24:31.37512 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 19
>> 2017-02-21 15:24:41.386974 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 1
>> 2017-02-21 15:26:41.530399 | LWLockNamed | ProcArrayLock | 1
>> (10 rows)
>>
>> writes pgbench runs have far more events logged, see the attached text
>> file. Maybe this is of interest...
>>
>>
>> [1] http://akorotkov.github.io/blog/2016/03/25/wait_monitoring_9_6/
>
> This patch applies cleanly at cccbdde. It doesn't break compilation on
> amd64 but I can't test on a Power-based machine
>
> Alexander, have you had a chance to look at Bernd's results?

I'm marking this submission "Waiting for Author" as your input seems to
be required.

This thread has been idle for a week. Please respond and/or post a new
patch by 2017-03-28 00:00 AoE (UTC-12) or this submission will be marked
"Returned with Feedback".

--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aleksander Alekseev 2017-03-24 15:18:01 Re: Declarative partitioning optimization for large amount of partitions
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2017-03-24 15:10:40 Re: Re: [BUGS] Problem in using pgbench's --connect(-C) and --rate=rate(-R rate) options together.