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

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Cc: Tharakan, Robins <tharar@amazon.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: track_planning causing performance regression
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 23:44:05 +0900
Message-ID: <d4cb31e2-d43f-0811-8f10-cf8e2f052e5e@oss.nttdata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210418233615.GB7256@telsasoft.com>
References: <2895b53b033c47ccb22972b589050dd9@EX13D05UWC001.ant.amazon.com>
	<CAOBaU_ZNAjSQEdWK9ERsv6zqhdRqB_C0dVv97BrKETV4Rv7gig@mail.gmail.com>
	<d4a15deb-8a85-b78c-b447-bc5df7c4a926@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CAH2-WzmVP4ibDDSipQi_BamMrPeB72X8iW0R-T9gA-ZToG=m9g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH2-WznCT6rZYGYE_Zxf1oYDZVMyXqm+SWRx+R2b5-DX11pmpQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<42a13b4c-e60c-c6e7-3475-8eff8050bed4@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CAH2-WzmYXtaeCtTEmU_37Eiu5AuRM3etinKFKo=posnLtcxe3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<bc8125cb-264e-5a48-7d1f-17b84df831ed@oss.nttdata.com>
	<CAFj8pRC9Jxa8r5i0TNBWLb8mzuaYzEoLq3QOvip0jVpHPOLbVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<646e5cae-5e8b-feaa-43dc-014bf355bf08@oss.nttdata.com>
	<20210418233615.GB7256@telsasoft.com>



On 2021/04/19 8:36, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Reviewing this change which was committed last year as
> 321fa6a4a26c9b649a0fbec9fc8b019f19e62289
> 
> On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 03:57:38PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> On 2020/07/03 13:05, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>> pá 3. 7. 2020 v 4:39 odesílatel Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> napsal:
>>>
>>> Maybe there can be documented so enabling this option can have a negative impact on performance.
>>
>> Yes. What about adding either of the followings into the doc?
>>
>>      Enabling this parameter may incur a noticeable performance penalty.
>>
>> or
>>
>>      Enabling this parameter may incur a noticeable performance penalty,
>>      especially when a fewer kinds of queries are executed on many
>>      concurrent connections.
> 
> Something seems is wrong with this sentence, and I'm not sure what it's trying
> to say.  Is this right ?

pg_stat_statements users different spinlock for each kind of query.
So fewer kinds of queries many sessions execute, fewer spinlocks
they try to acquire. This may lead to spinlock contention and
significant performance degration. This is what the statement is
trying to say.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION





view thread (64+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <d4cb31e2-d43f-0811-8f10-cf8e2f052e5e@oss.nttdata.com>
Permalink:  ../d4cb31e2-d43f-0811-8f10-cf8e2f052e5e@oss.nttdata.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/d4cb31e2-d43f-0811-8f10-cf8e2f052e5e@oss.nttdata.com

 · 

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: masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com, pryzby@telsasoft.com, pavel.stehule@gmail.com, pg@bowt.ie, rjuju123@gmail.com, tharar@amazon.com
  Subject: Re: track_planning causing performance regression
  In-Reply-To: <d4cb31e2-d43f-0811-8f10-cf8e2f052e5e@oss.nttdata.com>

* 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