Re: Does this perf output seem 'normal'?
От | Alex Ignatov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Does this perf output seem 'normal'? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 57220F75.2010308@postgrespro.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Does this perf output seem 'normal'? (Peter Devoy <peter@3xe.co.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: Does this perf output seem 'normal'?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On 28.04.2016 1:11, Peter Devoy wrote: > I have now done a recording for 60 seconds during a batch of 1000 > requests and posted the results on a new issue on the Mapnik repo. > > Although Postgres still comes out on top in the perf results I > struggle to believe this is a Postgres issue. But, if anyone is > curious, the issue is here: > https://github.com/mapnik/mapnik/issues/3414 > > I may come back here if I don't have luck with the Mapnik developers. > > All the best > > > Peter > 3XE > P: 01326 567155 > M: 07770 693662 > A: 3XE Ltd > Tremough Innovation Centre > PENRYN > TR10 9TA > 3XE Ltd · Registered in England and Wales · 9356871 > > > On 27 April 2016 at 16:45, Peter Devoy <peter@3xe.co.uk> wrote: >>> If you really want to profile this, you should fire it off in a tight loop, using wget or ab2 or curl. >> Thanks Jeff, that sounds like a smart idea. I will try later when I >> have access to the server. >> >>> Hi! What do you want to see in perf stats? Maybe you can explain your problem more in details? >> Hi Alex ) I am hoping to find out which function calls are taking the >> longest because to the code is taking too long to only parse a small >> XML file and do a few quick database queries. The last version of >> this software was able to do a lot more in the same period of time. I >> realise this most likely a client software issue but was hoping it may >> be obvious whether Mapnik is spending too much time with Postgres. >> >> Unfortunately I may just have to try again to build Mapnik from source >> so that I can get debugging/profiling output, etc. -- I was hoping to >> avoid it because it is quite painful. Can you expand node from perf report where 33.55% and 13.37% and 38.04% 38.04%. PS Also do you know that in perf report second column is the total cpu time share and not the first ? And that is why total sum of second column is 100% but sum from first can be != 100%? First column is the % of time when child function(procedure) is working relative to main proc time. -- Alex Ignatov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: