Hi,
On 08/26/2015 11:53 PM, Tory M Blue wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Qingqing Zhou
<zhouqq.postgres@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:zhouqq.postgres@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Tory M Blue <tmblue@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:tmblue@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> Right now the 100% cpu process which is this index is only using
3.5GB
> and has been for the last 15 hours
>
If 100% cpu, you can do 'sudo perf top' to see what the CPU is busy
about.
Regards,
Qingqing
I appreciate the attempted help, but I know what it's doing, it's
creating indexes for the last 14+ hours.
Sure, but what exactly was it doing? 'perf top' might give us a hint
which function is consuming most of the time, for example.
> I've killed it now, as it was
about to run my machine out of disk space, stopped it at 97% full, could
not go any longer.
Which suggests it's using a lot of temp files.
Indexes are built by reading all the necessary data from the table (just
the columns), sorted and then an index is built using the sorted data
(because it can be done very efficiently - much faster than when simply
inserting the tuples into the btree index).
The fact that you ran out of disk space probably means that you don't
have enough space for the sort (it clearly does not fit into
maintenance_work_mem), and there's no way around that - you need enough
disk space.
I will now clean up the table a bit but will still have 500million rows
with 6 indexes on it. I will create the indexes after the data is laid
down vs during, so it doesn't block my other table replications. I will
then fire off my index creations in parallel for my other tables so I
can actually use the hardware the DB is sitting on.
That's a very bad idea, because each of the index builds will require
disk space for the sort, and you're even more likely to run out of disk
space.
But I guess the answer is, no real way to tell what the box is doing
when it's creating an index. Yes there was a lock, no I could not find a
way to see how it's progressing so there was no way for me to gauge when
it would be done.
Had it been waiting on a lock, it wouldn't consume 100% of CPU.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
