Re: [HACKERS] lock contention on parallel COPY ?

Tom Lane wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
>> heh no log archiving - I actually said that I'm now playing with
>> --truncate-before-load which seems to cause a noticeable performance (as
>> in IO generated) increase but I still see >130000 context switches/s and
>> a profile that looks like:
>
>> samples % symbol name
>> 55526 16.5614 LWLockAcquire
>> 29721 8.8647 DoCopy
>> 26581 7.9281 CopyReadLine
>> 25105 7.4879 LWLockRelease
>> 15743 4.6956 PinBuffer
>> 14725 4.3919 heap_formtuple
>
> Still a lot of contention for something, then. You might try turning on
> LWLOCK_STATS (this only requires recompiling storage/lmgr/lwlock.c) to
> get some evidence about what.

that one generates a huge amount of logs - output for ~60s into the load
is available here:

http://www.kaltenbrunner.cc/files/lwstats.txt (21MB!)

Stefan

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers