From: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tang, Haiying" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, Luc Vlaming <luc(at)swarm64(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS |
Date: | 2021-05-27 04:23:24 |
Message-ID: | CALj2ACXskhY58=Fh8TioKLL1DXYkKdyEyWFYykf-6aLJgJ2qmQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 9:43 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I have read it but I think we should try to ensure practically what is
> > happening because it is possible that first time worker checked in FSM
> > without taking relation extension lock, it didn't find any free page,
> > and then when it tried to acquire the conditional lock, it got the
> > same and just extended the relation by one block. So, in such a case
> > it won't be able to use the newly added pages by another worker. I am
> > not sure any such thing is happening here but I think it is better to
> > verify it in some way. Also, I am not sure if just getting the info
> > about the relation extension lock is sufficient?
> >
>
> One idea to find this out could be that we have three counters for
> each worker which counts the number of times each worker extended the
> relation in bulk, the number of times each worker extended the
> relation by one block, the number of times each worker gets the page
> from FSM. It might be possible that with this we will be able to
> figure out why there is a difference between your and Hou-San's
> results.
Yeah, that helps. And also, the time spent in
LockRelationForExtension, ConditionalLockRelationForExtension,
GetPageWithFreeSpace and RelationAddExtraBlocks too can give some
insight.
My plan is to have a patch with above info added in (which I will
share it here so that others can test and see the results too) and run
the "case 4" where there's a regression seen on my system.
With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-05-27 04:25:54 | Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2021-05-27 04:22:01 | Re: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key |