Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA381643822 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:46:18 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 13053-08 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:46:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3057763E839 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:46:08 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-96-244-14-10.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [96.244.14.10]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LpAhs-1O7kEq38dQ-00eoc6; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:46:06 +0100 Message-ID: <4B4E14EB.7080008@2ndquadrant.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:46:03 -0500 From: Greg Smith User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Haas CC: Eduardo Piombino , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my server References: <4B4D5698.8040808@emolecules.com> <4B4D61DA.7080008@postnewspapers.com.au> <603c8f071001130823l69804fe3m5c6fbb081c55c265@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <603c8f071001130823l69804fe3m5c6fbb081c55c265@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18558NyAccySusS3Ozne2em76GHi43hpVLW70x jhKn2CEdUl0vCr6sT+RLfBQ1HD8pOo+pAoDJ39EYrIleXejy6y PK3bffHvBujJcaBz3ecLhNuNF3aw8nQ X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.589 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=3.188 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201001/261 X-Sequence-Number: 37141 Robert Haas wrote: > I'm kind of surprised that there are disk I/O subsystems that are so > bad that a single thread doing non-stop I/O can take down the whole > server. Is that normal? Does it happen on non-Windows operating > systems? What kind of hardware should I not buy to make sure this > doesn't happen to me? > You can kill any hardware on any OS with the right abusive client. Create a wide table and insert a few million records into it with generate_series one day and watch what it does to queries trying to run in parallel with that. I think the missing step here to nail down exactly what's happening on Eduardo's system is that he should open up some of the Windows system monitoring tools, look at both disk I/O and CPU usage, and then watch what changes when the troublesome ALTER TABLE shows up. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com