Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ECDA2E4C2B for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:11:57 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16229-01-2 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:11:30 -0400 (AST) Received: from mx.comgate.cz (mx.comgate.cz [193.165.185.50]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C832E4C26 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:11:50 -0400 (AST) Received: from alibaba ([127.0.0.1] helo=[10.1.0.53] ident=root) by mx.comgate.cz with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1JDHnX-00061B-00; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:11:39 +0100 Message-ID: <47874EE8.2050406@comgate.cz> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:11:36 +0100 From: Jakub Ouhrabka User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Linux/PostgreSQL scalability issue - problem with 8 cores References: <7083.1199379570@sss.pgh.pa.us> <477D1D59.7050002@comgate.cz> <4782063C.7070105@comgate.cz> <26502.1199745090@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4782AB4D.8010009@comgate.cz> <27655.1199750492@sss.pgh.pa.us> <47836A4C.5080707@comgate.cz> <10713.1199813111@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <10713.1199813111@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200801/64 X-Sequence-Number: 28303 Hi Tom, > I doubt we'd risk destabilizing 8.3 at this point, for a problem that > affects so few people; let alone back-patching into 8.2. understand. > OK, that confirms the theory that it's sinval-queue contention. We'we tried hard to identify what's the cause of filling sinval-queue. We went through query logs as well as function bodies stored in the database. We were not able to find any DDL, temp table creations etc. We did following experiment: stop one of our clients, so there started to be queue of events (aka rows in db) for it to process. Then we started the client again, it started processing the queue - that means calling simple selects, updates and complex plpgsql function(s). And at this moment, the spike started even it shouldn't start to meet usual periodicity. It's consistent. We are pretty sure that this client is not doing any DDL... What should we look for to find the cause? Thanks for any hints, Kuba