From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop |
Date: | 2015-01-13 23:42:09 |
Message-ID: | 20150113234209.GD5245@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-01-13 17:39:09 -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > On 2015-01-13 15:17:15 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >> I'm inclined to think that this is a livelock, and so the problem
> >> isn't evident from the structure of the B-Tree, but it can't hurt to
> >> check.
> >
> > My guess is rather that it's contention on the freelist lock via
> > StrategyGetBuffer's. I've seen profiles like this due to exactly that
> > before - and it fits to parallel loading quite well.
>
> I think I've got it to pop again. s_lock is only showing 35%
> (increasing very slowly if at all) but performance is mostly halted.
> Frame pointer is compiled out. perf report attached.
> 35.82% postgres [.] s_lock
> 23.71% postgres [.] tas
> 14.01% postgres [.] tas
> 6.82% postgres [.] spin_delay
> 5.93% postgres [.] LWLockRelease
> 4.36% postgres [.] LWLockAcquireCommon
Interesting. This profile looks quite different?
What kind of hardware is this on?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-01-13 23:49:33 | Re: hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2015-01-13 23:39:09 | Re: hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop |