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

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>
To: Dave Owens <dave@teamunify.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>
Cc: Matheus de Oliveira <matioli.matheus@gmail.com>
Cc: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: query against pg_locks leads to large memory alloc
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:43:30 -0700
Message-ID: <1408473810.64930.YahooMailNeo@web122304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+OQrzi1S7k6tU8fept8D4=iD7LgOnv3kRAmp2RnmrDrtNJpJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+OQrzhdtpC-9enDpY_PTue3_eh9xxmP-z51fJHFqezvhJ-9Nw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJghg4+y5NcvjfJO+Ynad-5NcuHHOUOgFpUEP=fLA3WTgGAoCw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHyXU0w+haLQ2UdU_XjyiEPnC_Xp24QM4QjNYXFXQhtkvdSsgA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+OQrzhBziFavzH==iqrJegR5Us6q7EvbopkQAWJV9f-UYVthQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140819171710.GA15735@awork2.anarazel.de>
	<CA+OQrzjSJTaUMs5y5Ar=_aipSa115d7qNSZy==w8MiDEdG27Uw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+OQrzgZPudu4Rdo6+qFPS2Y-bfXmHCfVuJtfFE-=0NXmZb9mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1408471302.64928.YahooMailNeo@web122302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<CA+OQrzi1S7k6tU8fept8D4=iD7LgOnv3kRAmp2RnmrDrtNJpJQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe:  <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>

Dave Owens <dave@teamunify.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> wrote:

>> CREATE TABLE activity_snap_1 AS SELECT * FROM pg_stat_activity;

> Would the you or the list be interested in snapshots of pg_locks as well?

Most definitely!  I'm sorry that copied/pasted the pg_stat_activity
example, I was playing with both.  pg_locks is definitely the more
important one, but it might be useful to try to match some of these
locks up against process information as we drill down from the
summary to see examples of what makes up those numbers.

> I can take a restart tonight and get this going on a half-hourly basis
> (unless you think more frequent snaps would be useful).

Each half-hour should be fine as long as that gives at least three
or four samples before you are unable to query pg_locks.

--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance



view thread (20+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <1408473810.64930.YahooMailNeo@web122304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Permalink:  ../1408473810.64930.YahooMailNeo@web122304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/1408473810.64930.YahooMailNeo@web122304.mail.ne1.yahoo.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-performance@postgresql.org
  Cc: kgrittn@ymail.com, dave@teamunify.com, andres@2ndquadrant.com, mmoncure@gmail.com, matioli.matheus@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: query against pg_locks leads to large memory alloc
  In-Reply-To: <1408473810.64930.YahooMailNeo@web122304.mail.ne1.yahoo.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