Received: from localhost (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D969FBC7E for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:01:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 98003-05 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:01:27 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from FS.denninger.net (wsip-70-169-168-7.pn.at.cox.net [70.169.168.7]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B7C49FB98C for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:01:30 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.13] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by FS.denninger.net (8.13.8/8.13.1) with SMTP id l6PL1TI9088412 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:01:29 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from karl@denninger.net) Received: from [192.168.1.13] [192.168.1.13] by Spamblock-sys (LOCAL); Wed Jul 25 16:01:29 2007 Message-ID: <46A7BA28.5030203@denninger.net> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:01:28 -0500 From: Karl Denninger User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (Windows/20070716) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: Merlin Moncure , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Performance issue with 8.2.3 - "C" application References: <46A6A549.1040606@denninger.net> <29633.1185331558@sss.pgh.pa.us> <46A6BBB1.1020502@denninger.net> <46A6C080.10204@denninger.net> <122.1185333906@sss.pgh.pa.us> <46A6C50D.1000908@denninger.net> In-Reply-To: <46A6C50D.1000908@denninger.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAMBLOCK-MATCH: Matched [@postgresql.org+], message ok X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.06 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL=0.145, BAYES_40=-0.185, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200707/356 X-Sequence-Number: 26040 Looks like that was the problem - got a day under the belt now with the 8.2.4 rev and all is back to normal. Karl Denninger (karl@denninger.net) http://www.denninger.net Karl Denninger wrote: > Aha! > > BIG difference. I won't know for sure until the biz day tomorrow but > the "first blush" look is that it makes a HUGE difference in system > load, and I no longer have the stats collector process on the top of > the "top" list...... > > Karl Denninger (karl@denninger.net) > http://www.denninger.net > > > > > Tom Lane wrote: >> Karl Denninger writes: >> >>> Hmmmmm..... now that's interesting. Stats collector IS accumulating >>> quite a bit of runtime..... me thinks its time to go grab 8.2.4. >>> >> >> I think Merlin might have nailed it --- the "stats collector bug" is >> that it tries to write out the stats file way more often than it >> should. So any excessive userland CPU time you see is just the tip >> of the iceberg compared to the system and I/O costs incurred. >> >> regards, tom lane >> >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate >> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your >> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly >> >> >> %SPAMBLOCK-SYS: Matched [hub.org+], message ok >> > > > %SPAMBLOCK-SYS: Matched [@postgresql.org+], message ok > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend > > > %SPAMBLOCK-SYS: Matched [hub.org+], message ok %SPAMBLOCK-SYS: Matched [@postgresql.org+], message ok