| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Frost <jeff(at)pgexperts(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Soni M <diptatapa(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly |
| Date: | 2014-06-30 19:32:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20300.1404156750@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Jeff Frost <jeff(at)pgexperts(dot)com> writes:
> Sampling pg_locks on the primary shows ~50 locks with ExclusiveLock mode:
> mode | count
> --------------------------+-------
> AccessExclusiveLock | 11
> AccessShareLock | 2089
> ExclusiveLock | 46
> RowExclusiveLock | 81
> RowShareLock | 17
> ShareLock | 4
> ShareUpdateExclusiveLock | 5
That's not too helpful if you don't pay attention to what the lock is on;
it's likely that all the ExclusiveLocks are on transactions' own XIDs,
which isn't relevant to the standby's behavior. The AccessExclusiveLocks
are probably interesting though --- you should look to see what those
are on.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Frost | 2014-06-30 19:42:19 | Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly |
| Previous Message | Jeff Frost | 2014-06-30 19:25:30 | Re: Postgres Replaying WAL slowly |