From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Subject: | Re: heavily contended lwlocks with long wait queues scale badly |
Date: | 2024-01-11 03:17:47 |
Message-ID: | 20240111031747.GA3376512@nathanxps13 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 10:31:14AM -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 11/20/22 2:56 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I still think it might be worth to backpatch in a bit, but so far the votes on
>> that weren't clear enough on that to feel comfortable.
>
> My general feeling is "yes" on backpatching, particularly if this is a bug
> and it's fixable without ABI breaks.
Now that commit a4adc31 has had some time to bake and concerns about
unintended consequences may have abated, I wanted to revive this
back-patching discussion. I see a few possibly-related reports [0] [1]
[2], and I'm now seeing this in the field, too. While it is debatable
whether this is a bug, it's a quite nasty issue for users, and it's both
difficult to detect and difficult to work around.
Thoughts?
[0] https://postgr.es/m/CAM527d-uDn5osa6QPKxHAC6srOfBH3M8iXUM%3DewqHV6n%3Dw1u8Q%40mail.gmail.com
[1] https://postgr.es/m/VI1PR05MB620666631A41186ACC3FC91ACFC70%40VI1PR05MB6206.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com
[2] https://postgr.es/m/dd0e070809430a31f7ddd8483fbcce59%40mail.gmail.com
--
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andy Fan | 2024-01-11 03:17:52 | Re: the s_lock_stuck on perform_spin_delay |
Previous Message | jian he | 2024-01-11 03:13:35 | Re: POC PATCH: copy from ... exceptions to: (was Re: VLDB Features) |