bench on community
PostgreSQL.
Thank you
From: Jeremy Schneider
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 6:19 PM
To: Fred Habash
Cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Guideline To Resolve LWLock:SubtransControlLock
On 8/17/18 11:07, Fred Habash wrote:
> Aurora Postgres 9
, August 20, 2018 6:19 PM
To: Fred Habash
Cc: pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Guideline To Resolve LWLock:SubtransControlLock
On 8/17/18 11:07, Fred Habash wrote:
> Aurora Postgres 9.6.3
Hi Fred! The Amazon team does watch the AWS forums and that's the place
to raise questi
On 2018-Aug-20, Fred Habash wrote:
> How do we go about calculating appropriate values for these two parameters ...
I don't know a lot about your system, so don't have anything to go on.
Also, Aurora is mostly unknown to me. What did Amazon say?
> > 'NUM_SUBTRANS_BUFFERS'?
> TOTAL_MAX_CACHED_SU
Thanks.
How do we go about calculating appropriate values for these two parameters ...
> 'NUM_SUBTRANS_BUFFERS'?
TOTAL_MAX_CACHED_SUBXIDS
And do both require a recompile?
-
Thank you.
On Aug 17, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> And as for the recompile, are you thinking 'NUM
On 2018-Aug-17, Fred Habash wrote:
> Aurora Postgres 9.6.3
Oh, okay, I don't know this one. Did you contact Amazon support?
> So, no chance to recompile (AFAIK).
> Is there a design anti-pattern at the schema or data access level that we
> should look for and correct?
Maybe ...
> And as for t
Aurora Postgres 9.6.3
So, no chance to recompile (AFAIK).
Is there a design anti-pattern at the schema or data access level that we
should look for and correct?
And as for the recompile, are you thinking 'NUM_SUBTRANS_BUFFERS'?
Thanks
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 2:36 PM Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>
On 2018-Aug-16, Fred Habash wrote:
> One of our database API's is run concurrently by near 40 sessions. We see
> all of them waiting back and forth on this wait state.
What version are you running?
> Why is it called Subtrans Control Lock?
It controls access to the pg_subtrans structure, which
One of our database API's is run concurrently by near 40 sessions. We see
all of them waiting back and forth on this wait state.
There is one scenario described in some forum where sessions connected a
read-only replica are affected. This does not apply to our use case.
Why is it called Subtrans
