| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sören Meyer-Eppler <soerenme(at)google(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0.4 blocking in lseek? |
| Date: | 2011-10-31 15:28:01 |
| Message-ID: | 27430.1320074881@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F6ren_Meyer-Eppler?= <soerenme(at)google(dot)com> writes:
>> embedded in often-executed plpgsql functions, for instance. Can you
>> identify which table the lseeks are issued against?
> I wouldn't know how? I'm just using htop and "s" on the postgres process
> to find these...
Note the file number appearing in the lseeks, run "lsof -p PID" against
the backend process to discover the actual filename of that file, then
look for a match to the filename in pg_class.relfilenode.
> I have attached two of the offending execution plans. Anything obviously
> wrong with them?
What makes you say these are "offending execution plans"? Both of them
seem to be completing just fine.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2011-10-31 15:34:55 | Re: SSL encryption makes bytea transfer slow |
| Previous Message | Sören Meyer-Eppler | 2011-10-31 14:09:37 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0.4 blocking in lseek? |