Re: [HACKERS] RE: 答复: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: [HACKERS] RE: 答复: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease
Дата
Msg-id CA+Tgmob8WYJ8HKZvTnYedqxfbG9nsA7Bsb-=C3U15dkkjUJtWw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на RE: 答复: [HACKERS] why after increase the hash table partitions, TPMC decrease  (Xiaoyulei <xiaoyulei@huawei.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Xiaoyulei <xiaoyulei@huawei.com> wrote:
> benchmarSQL has about half reads. So I think it should be effective.
>
> I don't think BufFreelistLock take much time, it just get a buffer from list. It should be very fast.

You're wrong.  That list is usually empty right now; so it does a
linear scan of the buffer pool looking for a good eviction candidate.

> The test server has 2 CPUs and 12 cores in each CPU. 24 processor totally. CPU Idle time is over 50%. IO only
10%(datais in SSD) 
>
> I perf one process of pg. The hot spot is hash search. Attachment is perf data file.

I think you need to pass -g to perf so that you get a call-graph
profile.  Then you should be able to expand the entry for
hash_search_with_hash_value() and see what's calling it.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised.
Следующее
От: Shaun Thomas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PL/pgSQL 2