Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TjbMh-0007XF-Nz for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:56:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TjbMg-0000wn-MB for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:56:10 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TjbMf-0000wh-Ms for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:56:09 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TjbMd-0003zN-AH for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:56:09 +0000 Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBEJu0m6005310; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 14:56:00 -0500 (EST) From: Tom Lane To: Andrew Dunstan cc: pgsql-perform Subject: Re: backend suddenly becomes slow, then remains slow In-reply-to: <50CB7284.3020008@pgexperts.com> References: <50CB7284.3020008@pgexperts.com> Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan message dated "Fri, 14 Dec 2012 13:40:04 -0500" Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 14:56:00 -0500 Message-ID: <5309.1355514960@sss.pgh.pa.us> 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 Andrew Dunstan writes: > One of my clients has an odd problem. Every so often a backend will > suddenly become very slow. The odd thing is that once this has happened > it remains slowed down, for all subsequent queries. Zone reclaim is off. > There is no IO or CPU spike, no checkpoint issues or stats timeouts, no > other symptom that we can see. The problem was a lot worse that it is > now, but two steps have alleviated it mostly, but not completely: much > less aggressive autovacuuming and reducing the maximum lifetime of > backends in the connection pooler to 30 minutes. > It's got us rather puzzled. Has anyone seen anything like this? Maybe the kernel is auto-nice'ing the process once it's accumulated X amount of CPU time? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance