On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Xiaoyulei <xiaoyu...@huawei.com> wrote: > Sum:66 > #0 0x00007f8273a77627 in semop () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #1 0x000000000060cda7 in PGSemaphoreLock () > #2 0x00000000006511a9 in LWLockAcquire () > #3 0x00000000004987f7 in _bt_relandgetbuf () > #4 0x000000000049c116 in _bt_search () > #5 0x0000000000497e13 in _bt_doinsert () > #6 0x000000000049af52 in btinsert () > #7 0x000000000072dce4 in FunctionCall6Coll () > #8 0x000000000049592e in index_insert () > #9 0x0000000000590ac5 in ExecInsertIndexTuples () > > > Sum:36 > #0 0x00007f8273a77627 in semop () from /lib64/libc.so.6 > #1 0x000000000060cda7 in PGSemaphoreLock () > #2 0x00000000006511a9 in LWLockAcquire () > #3 0x0000000000497e31 in _bt_doinsert () > #4 0x000000000049af52 in btinsert () > #5 0x000000000072dce4 in FunctionCall6Coll () > #6 0x000000000049592e in index_insert () > #7 0x0000000000590ac5 in ExecInsertIndexTuples ()
I don't know what "Sum" indicates here, but if the ratio of total calls to LWLockAcquire() between each LWLockAcquire() caller listed here is roughly in line with the "Sum" ratio, this must be a pretty small B-Tree (or the average size of each B-Tree must be very small). I suppose you could still see a lot of contention without the B-Tree ever getting much bigger if there is a lot of non-HOT updates. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
