Re: "not related" code blocks for removal of dead rows when using vacuum and this kills the performance
| От | Lars Aksel Opsahl |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: "not related" code blocks for removal of dead rows when using vacuum and this kills the performance |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AM7P189MB1028BBED91DD1AC1F9789DF59D502@AM7P189MB1028.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: "not related" code blocks for removal of dead rows when using vacuum and this kills the performance (Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>) |
| Список | pgsql-performance |
From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 8:29 AM
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 8:29 AM
>Re: "not related" code blocks for removal of dead rows when using vacuum and this kills the performance
>Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
>Lars Aksel Opsahl;
>pgsql-performance@lists.postgresql.org
>On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 05:46 +0000, Lars Aksel Opsahl wrote:
>> If this is expected behavior it means that any user on the database that writes
>> a long running sql that does not even insert any data can kill performance for
>> any other user in the database.
>
>Yes, that is the case. A long running query will hold a snapshot, and no data
>visible in that snapshot can be deleted.
>
>That can cause bloat, which can impact performance.
>
Hi
Thanks for the chat, seems like I finally found solution that seems work for this test code.
Adding a commit's like here /uploads/031b350bc1f65752b013ee4ae5ae64a3/test_issue_67_with_commit.sql to master code even if there are nothing to commit seems to solve problem and that makes sense based on what you say, because then the master code gets a new visible snapshot and then releases the old snapshot.
The reason why I like to use psql as the master/Orchestration code and not C/Python/Bash and so is to make more simple to use/code and test.
Lars
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: