From: | Ivan Voras <ivoras(at)freebsd(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Anyone seen this kind of lock pileup? |
Date: | 2010-11-17 22:53:58 |
Message-ID: | ic1me7$cio$1@dough.gmane.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 11/17/10 18:37, Josh Berkus wrote:
> All,
>
> Having an interesting issue on one 8.4 database. Due to poor application
> design, the application is requesting 8-15 exclusive (update) locks on
> the same row on parallel connections pretty much simultaneously (i.e. <
> 50ms apart).
>
> What's odd about this is that the resulting "lock pileup" takes a
> mysterious 2-3.5 seconds to clear, despite the fact that none of the
> connections are *doing* anything during that time, nor are there
> deadlock errors. In theory at least, the locks should clear out in
> reverse order in less than a second; none of the individual statements
> takes more than 10ms to execute.
Just a random guess: a timeout-supported livelock? (of course if there
is any timeout-and-retry protocol going on and the timeout intervals are
non-randomized).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Carey | 2010-11-17 23:20:15 | Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2010-11-17 22:48:31 | Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1? |