pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Improving connection scalability: GetSnapshotData()
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2020 14:30:24 -0400
Message-ID: <1006917.1597602624@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200816181604.l54m6kss5ntd6xow@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20200716012532.lfzpvg3w55d5rqrw@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<20200716013306.GA13861@alvherre.pgsql>
	<20200724011143.jccsyvsvymuiqfxu@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CA+hUKG+Jpj7iMin_URBcyUoWxvkVjvQAd+LbUQ4NR4aZALUhjg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKGK_4Sa0zHcfc+7HguHhQZ0dQn4P6yzMA1MsjHawmOq0ug@mail.gmail.com>
	<20200812001938.ixenvxdpg4ielbue@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CA+hUKGKdey77=asfyBd+-Hnmz6Y_R+TZ+wtogaTppEdVTCH+rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20200812173855.s4co5jz67z7tlnl7@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<872191.1597504251@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20200815164200.drok4tt5ju7ijivf@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<20200816181604.l54m6kss5ntd6xow@alap3.anarazel.de>

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> 690 successful runs later, it didn't trigger for me :(. Seems pretty
> clear that there's another variable than pure chance, otherwise it seems
> like that number of runs should have hit the issue, given the number of
> bf hits vs bf runs.

It seems entirely likely that there's a timing component in this, for
instance autovacuum coming along at just the right time.  It's not too
surprising that some machines would be more prone to show that than
others.  (Note peripatus is FreeBSD, which we've already learned has
significantly different kernel scheduler behavior than Linux.)

> My current plan would is to push a bit of additional instrumentation to
> help narrow down the issue.

+1

			regards, tom lane





view thread (102+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <1006917.1597602624@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../1006917.1597602624@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/1006917.1597602624@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, robertmhaas@gmail.com, thomas.munro@gmail.com, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, daniel@yesql.se, jkatz@postgresql.org, a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru, pg@bowt.ie, bruce@momjian.us, dgrowleyml@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: Improving connection scalability: GetSnapshotData()
  In-Reply-To: <1006917.1597602624@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox