Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMLAFGe5PEm79uRBrPFQvorKbkVPyfhAHbRGyAOg7MX=2Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes  (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> But I didn't think we were ever supposed to hold content
>> locks for that long.
>
> Isn't that lock held while doing visibility checks? What about I/O
> waiting for a clog page to be read?

So what we should be logging is the list of lwlocks held when the lock
wait occurred.

That would differentiate call paths somewhat better than just looking
at the current lock request.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dobes Vandermeer
Date:
Subject: Re: HTTP Frontend? (and a brief thought on materialized views)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: narwhal versus gnu_printf