Toshihiro, Let me know once you have the fix, I can help up to test it. :)
Thanks.. -- takizo On Sep 8, 2011, at 7:14 PM, Toshihiro Kitagawa wrote: > Hi Glyn, takizo, > > Sorry for delay. > > I fixed some memory leaks in pgpool-II 3.1 and V3_0_STABLE. > But I guess memory leaks are remaining as you say. > > Surely, free_parser() which was commented out might be problem. > However, I think simply uncommenting leads unexpected new problem. > So we have to fix those carefully. > > I will investigate and fix memory problems which was posted to > this ML from now on. > > Regards, > > -- > Toshihiro Kitagawa > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > > On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 16:22:50 +0800 > takizo <paul...@takizo.com> wrote: > >> Glyn, >> >> Surely, I will try 2.3.3 :) >> Thanks a lot >> >> -- >> Paul Ooi >> >> >> >> On Sep 8, 2011, at 4:00 PM, Glyn Astill wrote: >> >>> Hi takizo, >>> >>> We are currently using Pgpool-II 2.3.3 and it has been really stable for >>> us. Unless you're after a specific feature in Pgpool-II 3.x you could >>> perhaps try it? >>> >>> So far I've had no luck with the patch posted by Yoshiyuki, even with that >>> patch there is still a massive memory leak in 3.0.4. It would appear that >>> pool_proto_modules.c has lots commented out calls to free_parser(), many >>> more than the single case that Yoshiyuki uncommented with his patch, so >>> either there is a bit of a mess there that needs sorting out by someone who >>> knows the overall logic, or the issue is elsewhere. >>> >>> Glyn >>> >>> From: takizo <paul...@takizo.com> >>> To: Glyn Astill <glynast...@yahoo.co.uk> >>> Cc: "pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org" <pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org> >>> Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2011, 1:48 >>> Subject: Re: [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool II >>> >>> Gyln, >>> >>> Thanks. I happened to read through the thread after posted the mail. It >>> seems like I have to stick with Pgpool I until the developer is free. >>> >>> -- >>> takizo >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 7, 2011, at 10:53 PM, Glyn Astill wrote: >>> >>>> Hi takizo, >>>> >>>> Yes this bug has been seen by numerous people on the list, Yoshiyuki Asaba >>>> has posted a patch, however there has been no response from the main >>>> Pgpool II developers. >>>> >>>> I did ask a few times, and also asked if we'd be better testing 3.1, but >>>> alas still no response. I can only assume the devs are busy or otherwise >>>> indisposed. >>>> >>>> See the thread below for the patch. >>>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org/msg03141.html >>>> >>>> Glyn >>>> >>>> From: takizo <paul...@takizo.com> >>>> To: pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org >>>> Sent: Wednesday, 7 September 2011, 15:02 >>>> Subject: [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool II >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Today I have upgraded Pgpool I to Pgpool II. And I had to roll back to >>>> Pgpool I due to memory hunger issue. >>>> >>>> My server is configured with >>>> PostgreSQL 8.2, >>>> running on FreeBSD 8.2 >>>> Intel Xeon box with 4 CPUs with Quad Core, total of 16 cores >>>> Memory with 24GB >>>> >>>> * While running on Pgpool I >>>> I do no have memory hunger issue. On postgresql.conf, I have >>>> max_connections=200 and shared_buffers=2GB. >>>> Most of the time, I have 8GB memory in used and 10GB Free and some in >>>> cached. Everything run just fine and perfectly good. >>>> >>>> * I tried upgraded to Pgpool II >>>> Same config on postgresql.conf, when I started PgPool II (3.0.4), my >>>> active memory started increasing and it didn't drop at all. >>>> I left the server running and after about 20 minutes, 20GB memory is in >>>> used, ended up it used swap memory because running out of memory. >>>> >>>> I run a reload/restart on pgpool, I gained back 14GB of free memory, and >>>> slowly it started to taken up those freed memory in active memory after >>>> about 15-20 minutes. >>>> I tried to bring down max_connections and shared_buffers value, and the >>>> memory doesn't stop taking up. It still slowly gaining all the memory it >>>> wants. >>>> >>>> Has anyone having that problem as well? I hope I can find some answer here >>>> :) >>>> Wanted to try out pgpool II performance but this problem is the stopper >>>> for now. >>>> >>>> Hope to get feedback from gurus in the house. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> takizo >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pgpool-general mailing list >>>> Pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org >>>> http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ Pgpool-general mailing list Pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general