Anyone mind explaining to me these 2 fields as my performance degraded significantly these past 2 days i', suspecting it has something to do with them.
From what I read millis is the number of milli seconds for the operation to complete which in this case is 140
while timeLockedMicros is 146 which is suppose to mean time locked how can this be?
}
On Tuesday, 25 September 2012 11:04:37 UTC+2, FAQUser wrote:
> Anyone mind explaining to me these 2 fields as my performance degraded > significantly these past 2 days i', suspecting it has something to do with > them.
Spent all day playing around with the profiler and stuff and the only reason i can think of why the locking is taking so long is that the index does not fit on ram and making index updates for inserts slow.
On Tuesday, 25 September 2012 11:04:37 UTC+2, FAQUser wrote:
> Anyone mind explaining to me these 2 fields as my performance degraded > significantly these past 2 days i', suspecting it has something to do with > them.
The 'timeLockedMicros' field indicates how many microseconds this operation spent holding a particular lock.
There are two locks for each collection: the 'r' lock indicates how long this operation spent holding the read lock, and the 'w' lock indicates how long it spent holding the write lock.
The 'timeAcquiringMicros' field indicates how many microseconds this operation spent waiting for the locks.
If you're looking to diagnose general performance slowdown, I'll need additional information in order to do that.
If these systems are in MMS, then please post a link to the correct MMS group. If they're not please post the following in a gist/pastebing/pastie and post a link:
- Output of 'mongostat --all -n 20'
- Output of 'db.serverStatus()'
- Output of 'db.serverBuildInfo()'
I'll be able to use this information to move forward with my diagnosis.
On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 6:57:47 AM UTC-7, FAQUser wrote:
> Spent all day playing around with the profiler and stuff and the only > reason i can think of why the locking is taking so long is that the index > does not fit on ram and making index updates for inserts slow.
> On Tuesday, 25 September 2012 11:04:37 UTC+2, FAQUser wrote:
>> Anyone mind explaining to me these 2 fields as my performance degraded >> significantly these past 2 days i', suspecting it has something to do with >> them.