From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop |
Date: | 2015-01-13 22:33:30 |
Message-ID: | 20150113223330.GB5245@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2015-01-13 16:29:51 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On my workstation today (running vanilla 9.4.0) I was testing some new
> code that does aggressive parallel loading to a couple of tables. It
> ran ok several dozen times and froze up with no external trigger.
> There were at most 8 active backends that were stuck (the loader is
> threaded to a cap) -- each query typically resolves in a few seconds
> but they were hung for 30 minutes+.
Interesting.
> Had to do restart immediate as
> backends were not responding to cancel...but I snapped a 'perf top'
> before I did so. The results were interesting so I'm posting them
> here. So far I have not been able to reproduce...FYI
Can you compile postgres with -fno-omit-frame-pointer? Then, when this
happens the next time, you can take a perf record -g, which will tell us
which lock the contention is at.
> 61.03% postgres [.] s_lock
> 13.56% postgres [.] LWLockRelease
> 10.11% postgres [.] LWLockAcquire
That profile looks like it might end up being helped by the lwlock
and/or freelist changes in 9.5.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2015-01-13 22:40:20 | Re: hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2015-01-13 22:29:51 | hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop |