Re: Huge spikes in number of connections doing "PARSE" - Mailing list pgsql-general

From hubert depesz lubaczewski
Subject Re: Huge spikes in number of connections doing "PARSE"
Date
Msg-id 20110311151352.GA9904@depesz.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Huge spikes in number of connections doing "PARSE"  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: Huge spikes in number of connections doing "PARSE"
List pgsql-general
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 03:03:55AM -0500, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 09:38:07PM +0100, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:
> > So. every now and then (couple of times per day at most). I see hundreds
> > (800-900) of connections in "PARSE" state.
> >
> > I did notice one thing.
> >
> > we do log output of ps axo user,pid,ppid,pgrp,%cpu,%mem,rss,lstart,nice,nlwp,sgi_p,cputime,tty,wchan:25,args
> > every 15 seconds or so.
> >
> > And based on its output, I was able to get stats of "wchan" of all PARSE
> > pg processes when the problem was logged.
> > Results:
> >
> > 805 x semtimedop
> >  10 x stext
> >
> > Any ideas on what could be wrong? Machine was definitely not loaded most
> > of the times it happened.
> >
> > The problem usually goes away in ~ 10-15 seconds.
>
> Would you have your monitoring process detect this condition and capture stack
> traces, preferably from a gdb with access to debug information, of several of
> these processes?  That will probably make the specific contention point clear.

unfortunately debug was not enabled on this server, and changing
binaries would be rather complicated as it's production environment.

i'm not a c programmer, can you tell me how to get stack trace (assuming
it makes any sense without debug enabled) without damaging the process
in any way?

Best regards,

depesz

--
The best thing about modern society is how easy it is to avoid contact with it.
                                                             http://depesz.com/

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Igor Neyman"
Date:
Subject: Re: sort mem: size in RAM vs size on Disk
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Why length(to_char(1::integer, '9')) = 2 ?