Re: bad performance on irix - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
| From | Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: bad performance on irix |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | 003301c1ca64$5ad6c710$cab990c1@atc.unican.es Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: bad performance on irix ("Robert E. Bruccoleri" <bruc@stone.congenomics.com>) |
| Responses |
Re: bad performance on irix
("Robert E. Bruccoleri" <bruc@stone.congenomics.com>)
|
| List | pgsql-hackers |
nbuf is set to 6653, here is a excerpt from par, thanks and regards 0.000mS(+ 0uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): END-semctl() = 0 0.038mS(+ 37uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606,0x7fff1b50, 1) OK 20.122mS(+20084uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b10, 1) 27.747mS(+ 7624uS)[ 6] postgres(54373):END-semop() OK 27.772mS(+ 24uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b50, 1) OK 30.772mS(+ 3000uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) 35.681mS(+ 4908uS)[ 6] postgres(54373):END-semop() OK 35.703mS(+ 21uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 40.219mS(+ 4516uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) 58.859mS(+18640uS)[ 6] postgres(54373):END-semop() OK 58.882mS(+ 23uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) 61.475mS(+ 2592uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): END-semop() OK 61.495mS(+ 20uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10,1) OK 61.967mS(+ 471uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 62.839mS(+ 871uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 63.063mS(+ 224uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 65.175mS(+ 2112uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) 83.060mS(+17884uS)[ 6] postgres(54373):END-semop() OK 83.083mS(+ 22uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) 85.848mS(+ 2764uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): END-semop() OK 85.869mS(+ 21uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10,1) OK 87.775mS(+ 1906uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 87.898mS(+ 122uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b10, 1) OK 89.822mS(+ 1924uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b50, 1) OK 91.676mS(+ 1853uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) 100.127mS(+ 8450uS)[ 6] postgres(54373):END-semop() OK 100.152mS(+ 25uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 110.706mS(+10553uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b10, 1) OK 111.109mS(+ 403uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b50, 1) OK 112.860mS(+ 1750uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 113.292mS(+ 432uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 118.938mS(+ 5646uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 119.440mS(+ 502uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 120.410mS(+ 969uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 120.553mS(+ 142uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b50, 1) OK 126.386mS(+ 5833uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 126.919mS(+ 533uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 127.574mS(+ 654uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 128.011mS(+ 436uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 128.489mS(+ 477uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 128.895mS(+ 405uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 128.990mS(+ 95uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b50, 1) OK 149.407mS(+20416uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b10, 1) OK 149.969mS(+ 561uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b10, 1) OK 150.364mS(+ 395uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1b50, 1) OK 151.462mS(+ 1097uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) 156.185mS(+ 4723uS)[ 6] postgres(54373):END-semop() OK 156.204mS(+ 18uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 156.876mS(+ 671uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 158.145mS(+ 1269uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 158.873mS(+ 728uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK 159.773mS(+ 899uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a10, 1) OK 160.309mS(+ 535uS)[ 6] postgres(54373): semop(606, 0x7fff1a00, 1) OK
pgsql-hackers by date: