Thanks for the suggestions! It looks the issue is happening at the time of wal creation, does wal_init_zero off is good option?
Best On Wed, 5 Feb, 2025, 9:07 pm Álvaro Herrera, <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > Hello > > On 2025-Feb-05, Ramakrishna m wrote: > > > I have a system handling *300 TPS*, with resource usage *below 10%*. > > However, I’m noticing *commit latency of around 200ms* for *1% of > > transactions*, occasionally spiking to *1 second*. Since there is no > > significant *I/O pressure*, I’m trying to identify what else might be > > causing this in *PostgreSQL 16*. > > max_connections=8000 doesn't sound great -- how many of those are > active, typically, and how many are idle-in-transaction? And you have > autovacuum_naptime=5s ... which sounds rather dubious. Either somebody > with great expertise configured this very carefully, or the settings are > somewhat randomly chosen with little or no expert oversight. Do you > have monitoring on the amount of bloat on these database? Maybe you > should consider connection pooling and limit the number that are active, > for starters. > > Maybe have a look at whether pg_wait_sampling can give you more clues. > Some basic bloat monitoring is a prerequisite to any further performance > tweaking anyhow. > > -- > Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — > https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ > Maybe there's lots of data loss but the records of data loss are also lost. > (Lincoln Yeoh) >
