From: | Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: odd postgresql performance (excessive lseek) |
Date: | 2010-10-19 13:38:30 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimJmKx+3PZjO=7Z_d2Ts144RjnVh+RSYwfe9Aw5@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Jon Nelson <jnelson+pgsql(at)jamponi(dot)net> wrote:
>> No replies?
>>
>> This is another situation where using pread would have saved a lot of
>> time and sped things up a bit, but failing that, keeping track of the
>> file position ourselves and only lseek'ing when necessary would also
>> help. Postgresql was spending 37% of it's time in redundant lseek!
>
> 37% of cpu time? Is that according to strace -T? how did you measure it?
Per the original post, it (redundant lseek system calls) accounted for
37% of the time spent in the kernel.
strace -f -p <pid> -c
--
Jon
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Spiegelberg | 2010-10-19 14:12:48 | Re: how to get the total number of records in report |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2010-10-19 13:25:20 | Re: odd postgresql performance (excessive lseek) |