From: | Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews(at)supernews(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Anyone interested in improving postgresql scaling? |
Date: | 2007-04-10 22:09:38 |
Message-ID: | slrnf1o2p2.fcl.andrew+nonews@atlantis.supernews.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2007-04-10, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Kris Kennaway <kris(at)obsecurity(dot)org> writes:
>> I have not studied the exact code path, but there are indeed multiple
>> wakeups happening from the semaphore code (as many as the number of
>> active postgresql processes). It is easy to instrument
>> sleepq_broadcast() and log them when they happen.
>
> There are certainly cases where Postgres will wake up a number of
> processes in quick succession, but that should happen from a separate
> semop() kernel call, on a different semaphore, for each such process.
> If there's really multiple processes being released by the same semop()
> then there's a bug we need to look into (or maybe it's a kernel bug?).
> Anyway I'd be interested to know what the test case is, and which PG
> version you were testing.
This is a problem in FreeBSD, not specifically to do with postgres - the
granularity for SysV semaphore wakeups in FreeBSD-6.x and earlier is the
entire semaphore set, not just one specific semaphore within the set. I
explained that to Kris some weeks ago, and someone (mux) did a patch (to
FreeBSD, not pg) which was already mentioned in this discussion.
--
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-10 22:26:37 | Re: Anyone interested in improving postgresql scaling? |
Previous Message | Kris Kennaway | 2007-04-10 22:09:24 | Re: Anyone interested in improving postgresql scaling? |