From: MichaelDBA <MichaelDBA@sqlexec.com>
To: Jean Baro <jfbaro@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Batch insert heavily affecting query performance.
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2017 20:30:27 -0500
Message-ID: <5A4054B3.8010708@sqlexec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+fQee=kXxYL9v-Rb=eYEC9a7ZOiNe1hsSiqLgpRk+uTknF07Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+fQeemGw8j+01vjfFKDWYQHj9CtuOH4Mbv2YdwK9i3RrSY5jg@mail.gmail.com>
<BD95CF76-B664-4A35-BC2C-7568A5B78CEE@sqlexec.com>
<CA+fQee=kXxYL9v-Rb=eYEC9a7ZOiNe1hsSiqLgpRk+uTknF07Q@mail.gmail.com>
Yes it would/does make a difference! When you do it with one connection
you should see a big performance gain. Delayed, granted, extend locks
(locktype=extend) can happen due to many concurrent connections trying
to insert into the same table at the same time. Each insert request
results in an extend lock (8k extension), which blocks other writers.
What normally happens is the these extend locks happen so fast that you
hardly ever see them in the pg_locks table, except in the case where
many concurrent connections are trying to do a lot of inserts into the
same table. The following query will show if this is the case:
select * from pg_locks where granted = false and locktype = 'extend';
> Jean Baro <mailto:jfbaro@gmail.com>
> Sunday, December 24, 2017 7:09 PM
> Multiple connections, but we are going to test it with only one. Would
> it make any difference?
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> MichaelDBA@sqlexec.com <mailto:michaeldba@sqlexec.com>
> Sunday, December 24, 2017 6:52 PM
> Are the inserts being done through one connection or multiple
> connections concurrently?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> Jean Baro <mailto:jfbaro@gmail.com>
> Sunday, December 24, 2017 2:51 PM
> Hi there,
>
> We are testing a new application to try to find performance issues.
>
> AWS RDS m4.large 500GB storage (SSD)
>
> One table only, called Messages:
>
> Uuid
> Country (ISO)
> Role (Text)
> User id (Text)
> GroupId (integer)
> Channel (text)
> Title (Text)
> Payload (JSON, up to 20kb)
> Starts_in (UTC)
> Expires_in (UTC)
> Seen (boolean)
> Deleted (boolean)
> LastUpdate (UTC)
> Created_by (UTC)
> Created_in (UTC)
>
> Indexes:
>
> UUID (PK)
> UserID + Country (main index)
> LastUpdate
> GroupID
>
>
> We inserted 160MM rows, around 2KB each. No partitioning.
>
> Insert started at around 3.000 inserts per second, but (as expected)
> started to slow down as the number of rows increased. In the end we
> got around 500 inserts per second.
>
> Queries by Userd_ID + Country took less than 2 seconds, but while the
> batch insert was running the queries took over 20 seconds!!!
>
> We had 20 Lambda getting messages from SQS and bulk inserting them
> into Postgresql.
>
> The insert performance is important, but we would slow it down if
> needed in order to ensure a more flat query performance. (Below 2
> seconds). Each query (userId + country) returns around 100 diferent
> messages, which are filtered and order by the synchronous Lambda
> function. So we don't do any special filtering, sorting, ordering or
> full text search in Postgres. In some ways we use it more like a
> glorified file system. :)
>
> We are going to limit the number of lambda workers to 1 or 2, and then
> run some queries concurrently to see if the query performance is not
> affect too much. We aim to get at least 50 queries per second
> (returning 100 messages each) under 2 seconds, even when there is
> millions of messages on SQS being inserted into PG.
>
> We haven't done any performance tuning in the DB.
>
> With all that said, the question is:
>
> What can be done to ensure good query performance (UserID+ country)
> even when the bulk insert is running (low priority).
>
> We are limited to use AWS RDS at the moment.
>
> Cheers
>
>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: MichaelDBA@sqlexec.com, jfbaro@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Batch insert heavily affecting query performance.
In-Reply-To: <5A4054B3.8010708@sqlexec.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox