Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | torikoshia |
---|---|
Subject | Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query |
Date | |
Msg-id | 4e1e4e5d022964953e84468fe4e511b0@oss.nttdata.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query (James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-08-26 21:03, James Coleman wrote: > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 7:43 AM James Coleman <jtc331@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:02 AM torikoshia >> <torikoshia@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: >> > >> > On 2023-06-16 01:34, James Coleman wrote: >> > > Attached is v28 >> > > which sets ProcessLogQueryPlanInterruptActive to false in errfinish >> > > when necessary. Once built with those two patches I'm simply running >> > > `make check`. >> > >> > With v28-0001 and v28-0002 patch, I confirmed backend processes consume >> > huge >> > amount of memory and under some environments they were terminated by OOM >> > killer. >> > >> > This was because memory was allocated from existing memory contexts and >> > they >> > were not freed after ProcessLogQueryPlanInterrupt(). >> > Updated the patch to use dedicated memory context for >> > ProcessLogQueryPlanInterrupt(). >> > >> > Applying attached patch and v28-0002 patch, `make check` successfully >> > completed after 20min and 50GB of logs on my environment. >> > >> > >>> On 2023-06-15 01:48, James Coleman wrote: >> > >>> > The tests have been running since last night, but have been apparently >> > >>> > hung now for many hours. >> > >> > I don't know if this has anything to do with the hung you faced, but I >> > thought >> > it might be possible that the large amount of memory usage resulted in >> > swapping, which caused a significant delay in processing. >> >> Ah, yes, I think that could be a possible explanation. I was delaying >> on this thread because I wasn't comfortable with having caused an >> issue once (even if I couldn't easily reproduce) without at least some >> theory as to the cause (and a fix). >> >> > If possible, I would be very grateful if you could try to reproduce this >> > with >> > the v29 patch. >> >> I'll kick off some testing. >> > > I don't have time to investigate what's happening here, but 24 hours > later the first "make check" is still running, and at first glance it > seems to have the same behavior I'd seen that first time. The test > output is to this point: > > # parallel group (5 tests): index_including create_view > index_including_gist create_index create_index_spgist > ok 66 + create_index 26365 ms > ok 67 + create_index_spgist 27675 ms > ok 68 + create_view 1235 ms > ok 69 + index_including 1102 ms > ok 70 + index_including_gist 1633 ms > # parallel group (16 tests): create_aggregate create_cast errors > roleattributes drop_if_exists hash_func typed_table create_am > infinite_recurse > > and it hasn't progressed past that point since at least ~16 hours ago > (the first several hours of the run I wasn't monitoring it). > > I haven't connected up gdb yet, and won't be able to until maybe > tomorrow, but here's the ps output for postgres processes that are > running: > > admin 3213249 0.0 0.0 196824 20552 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > /home/admin/postgresql-test/bin/postgres -D > /home/admin/postgresql-test-data > admin 3213250 0.0 0.0 196964 7284 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: checkpointer > admin 3213251 0.0 0.0 196956 4276 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: background writer > admin 3213253 0.0 0.0 196956 8600 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: walwriter > admin 3213254 0.0 0.0 198424 7316 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: autovacuum launcher > admin 3213255 0.0 0.0 198412 5488 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: logical replication launcher > admin 3237967 0.0 0.0 2484 516 pts/4 S+ Aug25 0:00 > /bin/sh -c echo "# +++ regress check in src/test/regress +++" && > PATH="/home/admin/postgres/tmp_install/home/admin/postgresql-test/bin:/home/admin/postgres/src/test/regress:$PATH" > LD_LIBRARY_PATH="/home/admin/postgres/tmp_install/home/admin/postgresql-test/lib" > INITDB_TEMPLATE='/home/admin/postgres'/tmp_install/initdb-template > ../../../src/test/regress/pg_regress --temp-instance=./tmp_check > --inputdir=. --bindir= --dlpath=. --max-concurrent-tests=20 > --schedule=./parallel_schedule > admin 3237973 0.0 0.0 197880 20688 pts/4 S+ Aug25 0:00 > postgres -D /home/admin/postgres/src/test/regress/tmp_check/data -F -c > listen_addresses= -k /tmp/pg_regress-7mmGUa > admin 3237976 0.0 0.1 198332 44608 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: checkpointer > admin 3237977 0.0 0.0 198032 4640 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: background writer > admin 3237979 0.0 0.0 197880 8580 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: walwriter > admin 3237980 0.0 0.0 199484 7608 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: autovacuum launcher > admin 3237981 0.0 0.0 199460 5488 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: logical replication launcher > admin 3243644 0.0 0.2 252400 74656 ? Ss Aug25 0:01 > postgres: admin regression [local] SELECT waiting > admin 3243645 0.0 0.1 205480 33992 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: admin regression [local] SELECT waiting > admin 3243654 99.9 0.0 203156 31504 ? Rs Aug25 1437:49 > postgres: admin regression [local] VACUUM > admin 3243655 0.0 0.1 212036 38504 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: admin regression [local] SELECT waiting > admin 3243656 0.0 0.0 206024 30892 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: admin regression [local] DELETE waiting > admin 3243657 0.0 0.1 205568 32232 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: admin regression [local] ALTER TABLE waiting > admin 3243658 0.0 0.0 203740 21532 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: admin regression [local] ANALYZE waiting > admin 3243798 0.0 0.0 199884 8464 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: autovacuum worker > admin 3244733 0.0 0.0 199492 5956 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: autovacuum worker > admin 3245652 0.0 0.0 199884 8468 ? Ss Aug25 0:00 > postgres: autovacuum worker > > As you can see there are a bunch of backends presumably waiting, and > also the VACUUM process has been pegging a single CPU core for at > least since that ~16 hour ago mark. > > I hope to be able to do more investigation later, but I wanted to at > least give you this information now. Thanks a lot for testing the patch! I really appreciate your cooperation. Hmm, I also tested on the current HEAD(165d581f146b09) again on Ubuntu 22.04 and macOS, but unfortunately(fortunately?) they succeeded as below: ``` $ git apply v29-0001-Add-function-to-log-the-plan-of-the-query.patch $ git apply v28-0002-Testing-attempt-logging-plan-on-ever-CFI-call.patch $ ./configure --enable-debug --enable-cassert $ make $ make check ...(snip)... # parallel group (5 tests): index_including index_including_gist create_view create_index create_index_spgist ok 66 + create_index 25033 ms ok 67 + create_index_spgist 26144 ms ok 68 + create_view 3061 ms ok 69 + index_including 976 ms ok 70 + index_including_gist 2998 ms # parallel group (16 tests): create_cast errors create_aggregate roleattributes drop_if_exists hash_func typed_table create_am select constraints updatable_views inherit triggers vacuum create_function_sql infinite_recurse ok 71 + create_aggregate 225 ms ok 72 + create_function_sql 18874 ms ok 73 + create_cast 168 ms ...(snip)... # All 215 tests passed. ``` If you notice any difference, I would be grateful if you could let me know. -- Regards, -- Atsushi Torikoshi NTT DATA Group Corporation
pgsql-hackers by date: