From: | Robert James <srobertjames(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Chris <dmagick(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Will Postgres ever lock with read only queries? |
Date: | 2009-07-28 13:17:56 |
Message-ID: | e09785e00907280617n3d2b32ccy47f46039fb92d7ab@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Thanks for the replies. I'm running Postgres 8.2 on Windows XP, Intel Core
Duo (though Postgres seems to use only one 1 core).
The queries are self joins on very large tables, with lots of nested loops.
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Chris <dmagick(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Robert James wrote:
> >> Hi. I'm seeing some weird behavior in Postgres. I'm running read only
> >> queries (SELECT that is - no UPDATE or DELETE or INSERT is happening at
> >> all). I can run one rather complicated query and the results come
> >> back... eventually. Likewise with another. But, when I run both
> >> queries at the same time, Postgres seems to ground to a halt.
>
> > They're probably not blocking each other but more likely you're
> > exhausting your servers resources. If they return "eventually"
> > individually, then running both at the same time will take at least
> > "eventually x2".
>
> It could be a lot more than x2. If the two queries together eat enough
> RAM to drive the machine into swapping, where it didn't swap while
> doing one at a time, the slowdown could be orders of magnitude.
>
> Watching vmstat output might be informative --- it would at least give
> an idea if the bottleneck is CPU, I/O, or swap.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nikolas Everett | 2009-07-28 14:25:45 | Re: Will Postgres ever lock with read only queries? |
Previous Message | Matthew Wakeling | 2009-07-28 09:45:01 | Re: hyperthreaded cpu still an issue in 8.4? |