From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
Date: | 2006-06-21 16:19:57 |
Message-ID: | 11069.1150906797@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
I wrote:
> BTW, according to "top" the CPU usage percentages in these tests are
> on the order of 55% backend, 45% psql. Methinks psql needs a round
> of performance tuning ...
oprofile tells the tale:
CPU: P4 / Xeon with 2 hyper-threads, speed 2793.03 MHz (estimated)
Counted GLOBAL_POWER_EVENTS events (time during which processor is not stopped)
with a unit mask of 0x01 (mandatory) count 240000
GLOBAL_POWER_E...|
samples| %|
------------------
682534 52.7683 /usr/lib/debug/lib/modules/2.6.16-1.2133_FC5/vmlinux
274747 21.2413 /home/tgl/testversion/bin/postgres
226306 17.4962 /lib64/libc-2.4.so
54296 4.1977 /home/tgl/testversion/bin/psql
45376 3.5081 /home/tgl/testversion/lib/libpq.so.5.0
5302 0.4099 /usr/bin/oprofiled
1954 0.1511 /oprofile
It's all about the kernel process-switch overhead, which is being blamed
equally on both processes.
I did find some low-hanging fruit in GetVariable(), but nothing else
that looked readily improvable.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-06-21 16:41:32 | UTF8 server-side on Win32? |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2006-06-21 16:09:22 | Re: CVS HEAD busted on Windows? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-06-22 02:13:03 | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-21 15:02:47 | Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |