Re: Lock contention high - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Ashkil Dighin
Subject Re: Lock contention high
Date
Msg-id CAH6zzqBhFXVNKT7T=CbZ65fQS++h6vG3fhewWytWvxPskQHWKA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Lock contention high  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Lock contention high  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Lock contention high  (arjun shetty <arjunshetty955@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Hi
I suspect lock contention and performance issues with __int128. And I would like to check the performance by forcibly disabling int128(Maxalign16bytes) and enable like long long(maxlign 8bytes). 
 Is it possible to disable int128 in PostgreSQL?

On Thursday, October 28, 2021, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
Hi,

On October 27, 2021 2:44:56 PM PDT, Ashkil Dighin <ashkildighin76@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>Yes, lock contention reduced with postgresqlv14.
>Lock acquire reduced 18% to 10%
>10.49 %postgres  postgres            [.] LWLockAcquire
>5.09%  postgres  postgres            [.] _bt_compare
>
>Is lock contention can be reduced to 0-3%?

Probably not, or at least not easily. Because of the atomic instructions the locking also includes  some other costs (e.g. cache misses, serializing store buffers,...).

There's a good bit we can do to increase the cache efficiency around buffer headers, but it won't get us quite that low I'd guess.


>On pg-stat-activity shown LwLock as “BufferCounter” and “WalInsert”

Without knowing what proportion they have to each and to non-waiting backends that unfortunately doesn't help that much..

Andres

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: performance of analytical query
Next
From: Jiří Fejfar
Date:
Subject: Re: performance of analytical query