Re: Planner performance extremely affected by an hanging transaction (20-30 times)? - Mailing list pgsql-performance
From | Julian |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Planner performance extremely affected by an hanging transaction (20-30 times)? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 523BA815.5090606@internode.on.net Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Planner performance extremely affected by an hanging transaction (20-30 times)? (Bartłomiej Romański <br@sentia.pl>) |
Responses |
Re: Planner performance extremely affected by an hanging
transaction (20-30 times)?
|
List | pgsql-performance |
Hi Bart, You are doing heavy random reads in addition to a 1000k row insert within a single transaction. Also it is not clear whether your query within the python loop is itself within a transaction. (i.e. pyscopg2.connection.autocommit to True, disables transactional queries). Depending on your pg adapter, it may open a transaction by default even though it may not be required. So please clarify whether this is the case. Regards, Julian. On 20/09/13 10:49, Bartłomiej Romański wrote: > Hi all > > We're experiencing a very strange performance issue. Our setup is a > bit more complicated, but we've managed to isolate and replicate the > core problem. Here's what we observe: > > We took a strong machine (128 GB RAM, 8-core CPU, SSD drives...) and > installed a fresh copy of PostgreSQL 9.2 (Ubuntu Server 12.04 LTS, > default configuration). > > Then, we created a test database with the following schema: > > CREATE TABLE offers > ( > id bigserial NOT NULL, > name character varying NOT NULL, > category_id bigint NOT NULL, > CONSTRAINT offers_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id) > ); > > CREATE TABLE categories > ( > id bigserial NOT NULL, > name character varying NOT NULL, > CONSTRAINT categories_pkey PRIMARY KEY (id) > ); > > and populated it with in the following way: > > insert into categories (name) select 'category_' || x from > generate_series(1,1000) as x; > insert into offers (name, category_id) select 'offer_' || x, > floor(random() * 1000) + 1 from generate_series(1,1000*1000) as x; > > Finally, we created a python script to make simple queries in a loop: > > while True: > id = random.randrange(1, 1000 * 1000) > db.execute('select offers.id <http://offers.id/>, offers.name > <http://offers.name/>, categories.id <http://categories.id/>, > categories.name <http://categories.name/> from offers left join > categories on categories.id <http://categories.id/> = > offers.category_id where offers.id <http://offers.id/> = %s', (id,)) > print db.fetchall() > > We start 20 instances simultaneously and measure performance: > > parallel -j 20 ./test.py -- $(seq 1 20) | pv -i1 -l > /dev/null > > Normally we observe about 30k QPS what's a satisfying result (without > any tuning at all). > > The problem occurs when we open a second console, start psql and type: > > pgtest=> begin; insert into categories (name) select 'category_' || x > from generate_series(1,1000) as x; > > We start a transaction and insert 1k records to the 'categories' > table. After that performance of the benchmark described above > immediately drops to about 1-2k QPS. That's 20-30 times! After closing > the transaction (committing or aborting - doesn't matter) it > immediately jumps back to 30k QPS. > > Restarting the running script and other simple tricks do not change > anything. The hanging, open transaction is causing a huge slowdown. > What's more when doing similar insert (even much larger) to the > 'offers' table we do not observe this effect. > > We analyzed the problem a bit deeper and find out that the actual > query execution times are not affected that much. They are constantly > close to 0.5 ms. This can be observed in a server log (after enabling > appropriate option) and this can be found in 'explain analyze...' > result. Also the query plan returned do not change and looks optimal > (pkey scan for 'offers' + pkey scan for 'categories'). > > After a few random thought we've finally turned the > 'log_planner_stats' option and found out that the planner executions > times are highly affected by the hanging transaction. Here's the > typical output in the initial situation: > > 2013-09-17 21:54:59 UTC LOG: PLANNER STATISTICS > 2013-09-17 21:54:59 UTC DETAIL: ! system usage stats: > ! 0.000137 elapsed 0.000000 user 0.000000 system sec > ! [2.169670 user 0.383941 sys total] > ! 0/0 [0/11520] filesystem blocks in/out > ! 0/0 [0/7408] page faults/reclaims, 0 [0] swaps > ! 0 [0] signals rcvd, 0/0 [0/0] messages rcvd/sent > ! 0/0 [1362/7648] voluntary/involuntary context switches > > And here's a typical output with a hanging transaction: > > 2013-09-17 21:56:12 UTC LOG: PLANNER STATISTICS > 2013-09-17 21:56:12 UTC DETAIL: ! system usage stats: > ! 0.027251 elapsed 0.008999 user 0.001000 system sec > ! [32.722025 user 3.550460 sys total] > ! 0/0 [0/115128] filesystem blocks in/out > ! 0/0 [0/7482] page faults/reclaims, 0 [0] swaps > ! 0 [0] signals rcvd, 0/0 [0/0] messages rcvd/sent > ! 1/6 [12817/80202] voluntary/involuntary context switches > > As you can see it takes over 100 times more time when the extra > transaction is open! > > Any ideas why's that? It extremely affects total query time. > > I know that using prepared statements to solves the problem > completely, so we can deal with it, but we've already spend a lot of > time to go that far and I'm personally a bit curious what's the > fundamental reason for such a behavior. > > I'll be very thankful for any explanation what's going on here! > > Thanks, > BR
pgsql-performance by date: