Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XnwiU-0006Ti-Fz for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:41:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XnwiT-00066L-9I for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:41:41 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XnwiS-00066E-4n for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:41:40 +0000 Received: from smtprelay0153.b.hostedemail.com ([64.98.42.153] helo=smtprelay.b.hostedemail.com) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XnwiN-000685-39 for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:41:38 +0000 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (b-bigip1 [10.5.19.254]) by smtprelay02.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98D9BD39B8; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:41:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 616C76686572726540616C76682E6E6F2D69702E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 50, 0, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, :::, RULES_HIT:41:355:379:599:967:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1312:1313:1314:1345:1359:1437:1515:1516:1518:1519:1534:1540:1593:1594:1595:1596:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2198:2199:2393:2525:2560:2563:2682:2685:2828:2859:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3865:3867:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:3947:3950:3953:3956:3959:4250:4605:4659:5007:6117:6261:6630:7903:9025:9121:10004:10400:10848:11232:11256:11257:11658:11914:12517:12519:13069:13311:13357:13894:13895:21080, 0, RBL:none, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:fn, MSBL:0, DNSBL:none, Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: rain94_64d0fc35edb44 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1764 Received: from alvin.alvh.no-ip.org (unknown [186.37.90.111]) (Authenticated sender: alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org) by omf06.b.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:41:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by alvin.alvh.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0953A3BD0; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:40:01 -0300 (CLST) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:40:01 -0300 From: Alvaro Herrera To: Josh Berkus Cc: "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Lock pileup causes server to stall Message-ID: <20141110214000.GL1791@alvin.alvh.no-ip.org> References: <54611702.50308@agliodbs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <54611702.50308@agliodbs.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org Josh Berkus wrote: > All, > > pg version: 9.3.5 > RHEL 6.5 > 128GB/32 cores > Configured with shared_buffers=16GB > Java/Tomcat/JDBC application > > Server has an issue that whenever we get lock waits (transaction lock > waits, usually on an FK dependancy) lasting over a minute or more than > 10 at once, *all* queries on the server slow to a crawl, taking 100X to > 400X normal execution times. Current FK checking makes you wait if the referenced tuple is modified on any indexed column, not just those that are actually used in foreign keys. Maybe this case would be sped up if we optimized that. > * This applies even to queries which are against other databases, so > it's not purely a lock blocking issue. Oh. -- Álvaro Herrera 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