Thread

Commits

  1. pgbench: When using pipelining only do PQconsumeInput() when necessary.

  1. something is wonky with pgbench pipelining

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> — 2021-07-20T18:00:39Z

    Hi,
    
    I think something is slightly off with pgbench (or libpq) pipelining. Consider
    e.g. the following pgbench workload:
    
    \startpipeline
    SELECT 1;
    SELECT 1;
    SELECT 1;
    SELECT 1;
    SELECT 1;
    SELECT 1;
    SELECT 1;
    \endpipeline
    
    A pgbench run using that results in in endless repetitions of the below:
    pgbench -Mprepared -c 1 -T1000 -f ~/tmp/select1_batch.sql
    
    sendto(3, "B\0\0\0\22\0P0_1\0\0\0\0\0\0\1\0\0D\0\0\0\6P\0E\0\0\0\t\0"..., 257, MSG_NOSIGNAL, NULL, 0) = 257
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032370f0, 16384, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    ppoll([{fd=3, events=POLLIN}], 1, NULL, NULL, 8) = 1 ([{fd=3, revents=POLLIN}])
    recvfrom(3, "2\0\0\0\4T\0\0\0!\0\1?column?\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\27\0"..., 16384, 0, NULL, NULL) = 461
    recvfrom(3, 0x56140323727c, 15988, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x56140323723b, 16053, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032371fa, 16118, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032371b9, 16183, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x561403237178, 16248, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x561403237137, 16313, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032370f6, 16378, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    sendto(3, "B\0\0\0\22\0P0_1\0\0\0\0\0\0\1\0\0D\0\0\0\6P\0E\0\0\0\t\0"..., 257, MSG_NOSIGNAL, NULL, 0) = 257
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032370f0, 16384, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    ppoll([{fd=3, events=POLLIN}], 1, NULL, NULL, 8) = 1 ([{fd=3, revents=POLLIN}])
    recvfrom(3, "2\0\0\0\4T\0\0\0!\0\1?column?\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\27\0"..., 16384, 0, NULL, NULL) = 461
    recvfrom(3, 0x56140323727c, 15988, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x56140323723b, 16053, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032371fa, 16118, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032371b9, 16183, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x561403237178, 16248, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x561403237137, 16313, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    recvfrom(3, 0x5614032370f6, 16378, 0, NULL, NULL) = -1 EAGAIN (Resource temporarily unavailable)
    sendto(3, "B\0\0\0\22\0P0_1\0\0\0\0\0\0\1\0\0D\0\0\0\6P\0E\0\0\0\t\0"..., 257, MSG_NOSIGNAL, NULL, 0) = 257
    
    Note how recvfrom() returning EAGAIN is called 7 times in a row? There's also
    7 SQL statements in the workload...
    
    I think what's happening is that the first recvfrom() actually gets all 7
    connection results. The server doesn't have any queries to process at that
    point. But we ask the kernel whether there is new network input over and over
    again, despite having results to process!
    
    With a short pipeline this doesn't matter much. But if it's longer, adding a
    syscall for each statement in the pipeline does increase pgbench overhead
    measurably. An easy way to avoid that is to put a PQisBusy() && before the
    PQconsumeInput().
    
    Comparing pgbench of 100 pipelined SELECT 1;'s, under perf stat yields:
    
    perf stat -e task-clock,raw_syscalls:sys_enter,context-switches,cycles:u,cycles:k,instructions:u,instructions:k \
      schedtool -a 38 -e \
      /home/andres/build/postgres/dev-optimize/vpath/src/bin/pgbench/pgbench -n -Mprepared -c 1 -j1 -T5 -f ~/tmp/select1_batch.sql
    
    default:
    ...
    tps = 3617.823383 (without initial connection time)
    ...
              1,339.25 msec task-clock                #    0.267 CPUs utilized
             1,880,855      raw_syscalls:sys_enter    #    1.404 M/sec
                18,084      context-switches          #   13.503 K/sec
         3,128,615,558      cycles:u                  #    2.336 GHz
         1,211,509,367      cycles:k                  #    0.905 GHz
         8,000,238,738      instructions:u            #    2.56  insn per cycle
         1,720,276,642      instructions:k            #    1.42  insn per cycle
    
           5.007540307 seconds time elapsed
    
           1.004346000 seconds user
           0.376209000 seconds sys
    
    with-isbusy:
    ...
    tps = 3990.424742 (without initial connection time)
    ...
              1,013.71 msec task-clock                #    0.202 CPUs utilized
                80,203      raw_syscalls:sys_enter    #   79.119 K/sec
                19,947      context-switches          #   19.677 K/sec
         2,943,676,361      cycles:u                  #    2.904 GHz
           346,607,769      cycles:k                  #    0.342 GHz
         8,464,188,379      instructions:u            #    2.88  insn per cycle
           226,665,530      instructions:k            #    0.65  insn per cycle
    
           5.007539846 seconds time elapsed
    
           0.906090000 seconds user
           0.151015000 seconds sys
    
    
    1.8 million fewer syscalls, reduced overall "on cpu" time, and particularly
    0.27x of the system time... The user/kernel cycles/instruction split is also
    illuminating.
    
    Greetings,
    
    Andres Freund
    
    
    
    
  2. Re: something is wonky with pgbench pipelining

    Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> — 2021-07-20T18:57:15Z

    On 2021-Jul-20, Andres Freund wrote:
    
    > I think what's happening is that the first recvfrom() actually gets all 7
    > connection results. The server doesn't have any queries to process at that
    > point. But we ask the kernel whether there is new network input over and over
    > again, despite having results to process!
    
    Hmm, yeah, that seems a missed opportunity.
    
    > with-isbusy:
    > ...
    > tps = 3990.424742 (without initial connection time)
    > ...
    >           1,013.71 msec task-clock                #    0.202 CPUs utilized
    >             80,203      raw_syscalls:sys_enter    #   79.119 K/sec
    >             19,947      context-switches          #   19.677 K/sec
    >      2,943,676,361      cycles:u                  #    2.904 GHz
    >        346,607,769      cycles:k                  #    0.342 GHz
    >      8,464,188,379      instructions:u            #    2.88  insn per cycle
    >        226,665,530      instructions:k            #    0.65  insn per cycle
    
    This is quite compelling.
    
    If you don't mind I can get this pushed soon in the next couple of days
    -- or do you want to do it yourself?
    
    -- 
    Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
    "La espina, desde que nace, ya pincha" (Proverbio africano)
    
    
    
    
  3. Re: something is wonky with pgbench pipelining

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> — 2021-07-21T23:55:08Z

    Hi,
    
    On 2021-07-20 14:57:15 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
    > On 2021-Jul-20, Andres Freund wrote:
    > 
    > > I think what's happening is that the first recvfrom() actually gets all 7
    > > connection results. The server doesn't have any queries to process at that
    > > point. But we ask the kernel whether there is new network input over and over
    > > again, despite having results to process!
    > 
    > Hmm, yeah, that seems a missed opportunity.
    
    > > with-isbusy:
    > > ...
    > > tps = 3990.424742 (without initial connection time)
    > > ...
    > >           1,013.71 msec task-clock                #    0.202 CPUs utilized
    > >             80,203      raw_syscalls:sys_enter    #   79.119 K/sec
    > >             19,947      context-switches          #   19.677 K/sec
    > >      2,943,676,361      cycles:u                  #    2.904 GHz
    > >        346,607,769      cycles:k                  #    0.342 GHz
    > >      8,464,188,379      instructions:u            #    2.88  insn per cycle
    > >        226,665,530      instructions:k            #    0.65  insn per cycle
    > 
    > This is quite compelling.
    > 
    > If you don't mind I can get this pushed soon in the next couple of days
    > -- or do you want to do it yourself?
    
    I was thinking of pushing the attached, to both 14 and master, thinking
    that was what you meant, but then I wasn't quite sure: It's a relatively
    minor performance improvement, after all? OTOH, it arguably also just is
    a bit of an API misuse...
    
    I'm inclined to push it to 14 and master, but ...
    
    Greetings,
    
    Andres Freund
    
  4. Re: something is wonky with pgbench pipelining

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> — 2021-07-24T23:08:33Z

    Hi,
    
    Adding RMT.
    
    On 2021-07-21 16:55:08 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
    > On 2021-07-20 14:57:15 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
    > > On 2021-Jul-20, Andres Freund wrote:
    > > 
    > > > I think what's happening is that the first recvfrom() actually gets all 7
    > > > connection results. The server doesn't have any queries to process at that
    > > > point. But we ask the kernel whether there is new network input over and over
    > > > again, despite having results to process!
    > > 
    > > Hmm, yeah, that seems a missed opportunity.
    > 
    > > > with-isbusy:
    > > > ...
    > > > tps = 3990.424742 (without initial connection time)
    > > > ...
    > > >           1,013.71 msec task-clock                #    0.202 CPUs utilized
    > > >             80,203      raw_syscalls:sys_enter    #   79.119 K/sec
    > > >             19,947      context-switches          #   19.677 K/sec
    > > >      2,943,676,361      cycles:u                  #    2.904 GHz
    > > >        346,607,769      cycles:k                  #    0.342 GHz
    > > >      8,464,188,379      instructions:u            #    2.88  insn per cycle
    > > >        226,665,530      instructions:k            #    0.65  insn per cycle
    > > 
    > > This is quite compelling.
    > > 
    > > If you don't mind I can get this pushed soon in the next couple of days
    > > -- or do you want to do it yourself?
    > 
    > I was thinking of pushing the attached, to both 14 and master, thinking
    > that was what you meant, but then I wasn't quite sure: It's a relatively
    > minor performance improvement, after all? OTOH, it arguably also just is
    > a bit of an API misuse...
    > 
    > I'm inclined to push it to 14 and master, but ...
    
    RMT: ^
    
    Greetings,
    
    Andres Freund
    
    
    
    
  5. Re: something is wonky with pgbench pipelining

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2021-07-26T07:07:20Z

    On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 04:08:33PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
    > On 2021-07-21 16:55:08 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
    >> I'm inclined to push it to 14 and master, but ...
    > 
    > RMT: ^
    
    If it were me, I think that I would have back-patched this change even
    if found after the GA release of 14 as there is no advantages in
    keeping the current behavior either except overloading pgbench with
    unnecessary system calls.  No objections from me to change that now
    for 14~.
    --
    Michael