Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:21:50 +0200 From: Maxime Henrion <mux@FreeBSD.org> To: Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, performance@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Anyone interested in improving postgresql scaling? Message-ID: <20070410112150.GC39474@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <461B69C0.4060707@paradise.net.nz> References: <20070226002234.GA80974@xor.obsecurity.org> <461B69C0.4060707@paradise.net.nz>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Mark Kirkwood wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >If so, then your task is the following: > > > >Make SYSV semaphores less dumb about process wakeups. Currently > >whenever the semaphore state changes, all processes sleeping on the > >semaphore are woken, even if we only have released enough resources > >for one waiting process to claim. i.e. there is a thundering herd > >wakeup situation which destroys performance at high loads. Fixing > >this will involve replacing the wakeup() calls with appropriate > >amounts of wakeup_one(). > > I'm forwarding this to the pgsql-hackers list so that folks more > qualified than I can comment, but as I understand the way postgres > implements locking each process has it *own* semaphore it waits on - > and who is waiting for what is controlled by an in (shared) memory hash > of lock structs (access to these is controlled via platform Dependant > spinlock code). So a given semaphore state change should only involve > one process wakeup. Yes but there are still a lot of wakeups to be avoided in the current System V semaphore code. More specifically, not only do we wakeup all the processes waiting on a single semaphore everytime something changes, but we also wakeup all processes waiting on *any* of the semaphore in the semaphore *set*, whatever the reason we're sleeping. I came up with a quick patch so that Kris could do some testing with it, and it appears to have helped, but only very slightly; apparently some contention within the netisr code caused problems, so that in some cases the patch helped slightly, and in others it didn't. The semaphore code needs a clean rewrite and I hope to take care of this soon, as time permits, since we are heavy consumers of PostgreSQL under FreeBSD at my company. Cheers, Maximehome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070410112150.GC39474>