Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From ITAGAKI Takahiro
Subject Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2
Date
Msg-id 20060808110913.50FA.ITAGAKI.TAKAHIRO@oss.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2  (ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>)
Responses Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2
List pgsql-hackers
This is an additional information.

I wrote:
> If we want to resolve the probmen fundamentally, we might have to
> improve SubTrans using a better buffer management algorithm or so.

The above is maybe wrong. I checked each lwlock of pg_subtrans's buffers.
All lwlocks are uniformly acquired and I could not see any differences
among buffers. So the cause seems not to be a buffer management algorithm,
but just a lack of SLRU buffer pages.

NUM_SUBTRANS_BUFFERS is defined as 32 in HEAD. If we increase it,
we can avoid the old transaction problem for a certain time.
However, it doesn't help much on high-load -- for example, on a workload
with 2000 tps, we will use up 1000 pg_subtrans pages in 15 minites.
I suppose it is not enough for online and batch/maintenance mix.

Also, the simple scanning way in SLRU will likely cause another performance
issue when we highly increase the number of buffers. A sequential scanning
is used in SLRU, so it will not work well against many buffers.


I hope some cares in upper layer, snapshot, hitbits or something,
being discussed in the recent thread.

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Rod Taylor
Date:
Subject: Re: "Constraint exclusion" is not general enough
Next
From: "Pavel Stehule"
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal for PL packages for 8.3.