Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VJpGg-00075B-1X for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 18:35:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VJpGf-0003pt-Hp for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 18:35:57 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VJpGe-0003pn-P8 for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 18:35:56 +0000 Received: from smtp.01.com ([199.36.142.181] helo=smtp-out-2.01.com) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VJpGb-0004d2-3z for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 18:35:56 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-out-2.01.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FF9390159; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:35:51 -0500 (CDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp-out-2.01.com Received: from smtp-out-2.01.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp-out-2.01.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2_SCbBfe-Fnn; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:35:51 -0500 (CDT) Received: from smtp-out-2.01.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-out-2.01.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 245FC390167; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:35:51 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-out-2.01.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E949390160; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:35:51 -0500 (CDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp-out-2.01.com Received: from smtp-out-2.01.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp-out-2.01.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id k6021SdjKoSp; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:35:50 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.47.23.103] (70-36-143-10.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [70.36.143.10]) by smtp-out-2.01.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 548B5390159; Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:35:50 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <5230B801.90507@agliodbs.com> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:35:45 -0700 From: Josh Berkus Organization: PostgreSQL Experts Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130803 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Dunstan CC: Andres Freund , Jeff Janes , Amit Kapila , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Performance bug in prepared statement binding in 9.2? References: <51A699E6.3000008@agliodbs.com> <51A79512.4020200@agliodbs.com> <51FAA1B8.6040809@agliodbs.com> <522E69F1.8070203@dunslane.net> <20130910122036.GF1024477@alap2.anarazel.de> <522F146D.2070908@dunslane.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 All, We've confirmed that this issue is caused by having long-running idle transactions on the server. When we disabled their queueing system (which prodiced hour-long idle txns), the progressive slowness went away. Why that should affect 9.X far more strongly than 8.4, I'm not sure about. Does that mean that 8.4 was unsafe, or that this is something which *could* be fixed in later versions? I'm also confused as to why this would affect BIND time rather than EXECUTE time. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance