From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: old_snapshot_threshold vs indexes |
Date: | 2019-08-28 09:02:37 |
Message-ID: | CA+hUKGL_LhcLuobRd1e9f3RDpwwbvHh_8uYOmhCmF1Uc1V98AQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 3:05 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'd vote for back-patching to 10. Even if there is in fact no deadlock
> hazard, you've clearly demonstrated a significant performance hit that
> we're taking for basically no reason.
Done.
The second symptom reported in my first email looked like evidence of
high levels of spinlock backoff, which I guess might have been coming
from TransactionIdLimitedForOldSnapshots()'s hammering of
oldSnapshotControl->mutex_threshold and
oldSnapshotControl->mutex_threshold, when running
heap_page_prune_opt()-heavy workloads like the one generated by
test-indexscan.sql (from my earlier message) from many backends at the
same time on a large system. That's just an observation I'm leaving
here, I'm not planning to chase that any further for now.
--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2019-08-28 09:22:17 | Crash in BRIN summarization |
Previous Message | Alexander Kukushkin | 2019-08-28 08:38:39 | Re: Statement timeout in pg_rewind |