Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Lonni J Friedman
Тема
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation
Дата
Msg-id
CAP=oouH0tXbA-4qw0Hd0tbJV2wj1Lp8A=UaSf-dvV2-soap5jA@mail.gmail.com
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Eduardo Morras <emorrasg@yahoo.es>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: upgrade from 9.2.x to 9.3 causes significant performance degradation Lonni J Friedman <netllama@gmail.com>
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 2:02 AM, Kevin Grittner  wrote:
> Lonni J Friedman  wrote:
>
>> top shows over 90% of the load is in sys space.  vmstat output
>> seems to suggest that its CPU bound (or bouncing back & forth):
>
> Can you run `perf top` during an episode and see what kernel
> functions are using all that CPU?

I take back what I said earlier.  While the master is currently back
to normal performance, the two hot standby slaves are still churning
something awful.

If I run 'perf top' on either slave, after a few seconds, these are
consistently the top three in the list:
 84.57%  [kernel]               [k] _spin_lock_irqsave
  6.21%  [unknown]              [.] 0x0000000000659f60
  4.69%  [kernel]               [k] compaction_alloc

>
> This looks similar to cases I've seen of THP defrag going wild.
> Did the OS version or configuration change?  Did the PostgreSQL
> memory settings (like shared_buffers) change?

I think you're onto something here with respect to THP defrag going
wild.  I set /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/defrag to 'never' and
immediately the load dropped on both slaves from over 5.00 to under
1.00.

So this raises the question, is this a kernel bug, or is there some
other solution to the problem?
Also, seems weird that the problem didn't happen until I switched from
9.2 to 9.3.  Is it possible this is somehow related to the change from
using SysV shared memory to using Posix shared memory and mmap for
memory management?

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления
От: Jeff Janes
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Query - CPU issue
От: Jeff Janes
Дата:
FAQ