Horton

Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2012-04-02T11:01:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Add new files to NLS file lists

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Not true, please refer to code at line 544, as I already indicated.
>>
>> My understanding of the instrumentation is that the lock acquired at
>> line 526 will show as the blocker until we reach line 555, so anything
>> in between could be responsible for the wait.
>
> Hm, but then wouldn't the lock acquisition at line 544 be showing up as well?

Some time ago on this thread, I wrote:
"Anyway, just to note that it might not be I/O and we need to find out."

Do you consider this proof that it can only be I/O? Or do we still
need to find out?

-- 
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services