Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1x-52NUgR8eddo95DdB_Kt7vtfxtRByJ11mLxx7D0a1Pg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Oh, ho.  So from this we can see that the problem is that we're
> getting huge amounts of spinlock contention when pinning and unpinning
> index pages.
>
> It would be nice to have a self-contained reproducible test case for
> this, so that we could experiment with it on other systems.

I just posted a patch under subject "pgbench--new transaction type"
that introduces a pgbench -P option.

I think that that would do a good job of simulating unique-key
look-ups on the inner side of a nested loop (which is basically what
we have here) and so creating contention on index pages.  Right now I
don't have anything with more than 2 CPUs and 2 is not high enough to
get much contention so I can't post any meaningful numbers.  (pgbench
-P might also be of interest in hash index investigation)

Cheers,

Jeff


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile
Next
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile