On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:27:43 +0200, Stevan Bajić wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 10:24:25 -0400, Julien Vehent wrote: >> On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:55:01 +0200, Stevan Bajić wrote: >>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 08:34:34 -0400 >>> Julien Vehent <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>>> >>>> It's better now, it seems. It's been running for a few days >>>> without >>>> devouring memory: >>>> >>>> $ ps -ylC dspam >>>> S UID PID PPID C PRI NI RSS SZ WCHAN TTY >>>> TIME >>>> CMD >>>> S 999 18378 1 0 80 0 17264 45464 ? ? >>>> 00:02:56 >>>> dspam >>>> >>>> I did not change anything in dspam configuration, but I did tweak >>>> postgres a bit, essentialy adapting the shared_buffer. I don't >>>> know >>>> how >>>> that could have an influence on Dspam, or maybe it's just not >>>> related at >>>> all. >>>> >>> It is! How high was your shared_buffer? You know that by default >>> PostgreSQL is using (I think) 64 shared buffers each having 8Kb. >> >> I had a rather low shared buffer (16MB if I recall), I moved it to >> 512MB since I have 2GB on that machine, but the problem still >> occured. >> Now I reduced it to 128MB and it seems fine. >> I'm currently reading "postgresql high performance" to better >> understand those parameters :) >> >>> Some >>> operations lock the shared buffer and some don't. I guess that the >>> maintenance task of DSPAM is heavy using the shared buffer and this >>> results in such a high memory usage on your part. Remember that >>> 'ps' >>> is not always capable in detecting processes using shared memory >>> and >>> counts the shared memory as used memory. >>> >> >> Could you explain a bit more about this? I understand that the >> maintenance can generate high load on postgresql, loading a lot of >> records from the disk into memory, but why having a low shared >> buffer >> would reflect in high memory usage on DSPAM's end ? >> > Low? I understood that you had a high shared buffer in PostgreSQL > and > you lowered it and since you have lowered it the memory usage has > gone > down.
Both ! It was initially at 16MB, and I had the memory issue (my first post). So I pushed it to 512MB, and I still had the memory issue. Finally, I set it to 128MB, and I didn't have any issue anymore. /me goes back to the book ! Julien ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Dspam-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user
