From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id wKuGJtBMc1/sNAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:03:44 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id QDKTItBMc1/sXgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:03:44 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26B2F9404D2 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:33360 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kNHAK-0001K0-Qy for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:03:41 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36168) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kNH9i-0001He-Av for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:03:04 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45368) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kNH9i-0005Ei-02 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:03:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kNH9h-0002DB-K5 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:03:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#43564: cuirass: Contention while registering new builds. Resent-From: Mathieu Othacehe Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:03:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 43564 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 43564@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 43564-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B43564.16013917467889 (code B ref 43564); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 15:03:01 +0000 Received: (at 43564) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Sep 2020 15:02:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56914 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kNH98-00022z-0K for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:02:26 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:57366) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kNH96-0001yN-7r for 43564@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:02:24 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39143) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kNH90-00057I-Vs for 43564@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:02:18 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:19b:d9a0:d549:2a8f:de3b:c9c0] (port=51690 helo=cervin) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kNH8z-00035g-4K for 43564@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 11:02:17 -0400 From: Mathieu Othacehe References: <87imc5zrc8.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0wee3ud.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 17:02:14 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87k0wee3ud.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Mon, 28 Sep 2020 09:51:38 +0200") Message-ID: <87h7rglj7t.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.51 X-TUID: enjSD4rvxebT Hello, > In the best case of one pending evaluation, the registration duration is > reduced from 1800 seconds to 320 seconds. I think that the gain is way > larger when there are multiple pending evaluations. > > Pushed a fix as 461e07e14e1c8013343c0a2cb26c0e022e10d5e4. While this improves the situation, another evaluation contention episode occurred this afternoon (evaluations 16920 to 16938). Even though reading queries are cheaper, I guess that when 10 fibers try to execute 50k read queries, there's some contention in the communication with the 4 database workers. I'm trying locally to spawn database workers dedicated to registration, that execute the evaluation queries in a single batch. Let's see if it helps. Thanks, Mathieu