Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 11:19:51 +0200
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: 60 core performance with 9.3
Message-ID: <20140627091951.GA16680@awork2.anarazel.de>
References: <53ACB190.2030206@catalyst.net.nz>
 <CAOR=d=3=Y6yNtwQenwVBGe6ZgjAeA8PwgYb3=aQEKn+vYWhBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <53ACD6C4.9050605@catalyst.net.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53ACD6C4.9050605@catalyst.net.nz>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

On 2014-06-27 14:28:20 +1200, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> My feeling is spinlock or similar, 'perf top' shows
> 
> kernel find_busiest_group
> kernel _raw_spin_lock
> 
> as the top time users.

Those don't tell that much by themselves, could you do a hierarchical
profile? I.e. perf record -ga? That'll at least give the callers for
kernel level stuff. For more information compile postgres with
-fno-omit-frame-pointer.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

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


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