Re: Function won't complete

From: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Function won't complete
Date: 2002-04-28 19:39:06
Message-ID: web-1387143@davinci.ethosmedia.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Tom,

> This analysis is nonsense, because PG does not rely on WAL for
> transaction rollback, and the amount of WAL activity is *not*
> proportional to transaction length. (At least not since 7.1.2.)
<snip>
> However, until you drop
> your focus on the WAL we'll not find out what's really the
> bottleneck...

Sorry, Tom. I was used to the problems of 7.1.2, and didn't really
"get it" when you told me things had changed.

I still say it's the disk I/O, and I think your explanation of dead
tuples makes a lot of sense. The debug log is full of this:

DEBUG: proc_exit(0)
DEBUG: shmem_exit(0)
DEBUG: exit(0)
DEBUG: reaping dead processes
DEBUG: child process (pid 11933) exited with exit code 0
DEBUG: proc_exit(0)
DEBUG: shmem_exit(0)
DEBUG: exit(0)
DEBUG: reaping dead processes
DEBUG: child process (pid 11939) exited with exit code 0

And each one of the cycles about takes 5-10 minutes.

I'm a little reluctant to dump everything to the list, as we're talking
about a lot of data and code. Lemme do some judicious editing and I'll
send you a gzip package this week.

-Josh Berkus

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joseph Barillari 2002-04-29 00:56:23 Casting dates
Previous Message Gordon Clarke 2002-04-28 05:24:54 Re: Upgrading PostgreSQL to 7.1.3