From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Gavin Hamill" <gdh(at)laterooms(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg 8.1.3, AIX, huge box, painfully slow. |
Date: | 2006-04-07 22:12:39 |
Message-ID: | 17237.1144447959@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> writes:
> On 4/7/06 3:02 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> On the other hand, we already know that Xeons suck about as badly as
>> can be on that same measure; could the pSeries really be worse?
> I wouldn't be too surprised, but it sounds like it needs a test. Do we have
> a test for this? Is there a contention-prone query stream that we can think
> up?
If you want you could install a pre-8.1 PG and then try one of the
queries that we were using as test cases a year ago for spinlock
investigations. I don't recall details right now but I remember
having posted a pretty trivial test case that would send a
multiprocessor machine into context-swap storm, which sounds a whole
lot like what Gavin is seeing.
I think that 8.1 ought to be relatively free of buffer-manager spinlock
contention, which is why I doubt that test case would be interesting
against 8.1. The interesting question is what else is he seeing
contention for, if it's not the BufMgrLock?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Hamill | 2006-04-07 22:27:59 | Re: pg 8.1.3, AIX, huge box, painfully slow. |
Previous Message | Luke Lonergan | 2006-04-07 22:06:48 | Re: pg 8.1.3, AIX, huge box, painfully slow. |