On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 3:09 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> 2) The spinlocks both on the the sending and receiving side a quite hot:
>
> rafia query leader:
> + 36.16% postgres postgres [.] shm_mq_receive
> + 19.49% postgres postgres [.] s_lock
> + 13.24% postgres postgres [.] SetLatch
Here's a patch which, as per an off-list discussion between Andres,
Amit, and myself, removes the use of the spinlock for most
send/receive operations in favor of memory barriers and the atomics
support for 8-byte reads and writes. I tested with a pgbench -i -s
300 database with pgbench_accounts_pkey dropped and
max_parallel_workers_per_gather boosted to 10. I used this query:
select aid, count(*) from pgbench_accounts group by 1 having count(*) > 1;
which produces this plan:
Finalize GroupAggregate (cost=1235865.51..5569468.75 rows=10000000 width=12)
Group Key: aid
Filter: (count(*) > 1)
-> Gather Merge (cost=1235865.51..4969468.75 rows=30000000 width=12)
Workers Planned: 6
-> Partial GroupAggregate (cost=1234865.42..1322365.42
rows=5000000 width=12)
Group Key: aid
-> Sort (cost=1234865.42..1247365.42 rows=5000000 width=4)
Sort Key: aid
-> Parallel Seq Scan on pgbench_accounts
(cost=0.00..541804.00 rows=5000000 width=4)
(10 rows)
On hydra (PPC), these changes didn't help much. Timings:
master: 29605.582, 29753.417, 30160.485
patch: 28218.396, 27986.951, 26465.584
That's about a 5-6% improvement. On my MacBook, though, the
improvement was quite a bit more:
master: 21436.745, 20978.355, 19918.617
patch: 15896.573, 15880.652, 15967.176
Median-to-median, that's about a 24% improvement.
Any reviews appreciated.
Thanks,
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
