To: Igor Neyman <iney...@perceptron.com>;
Melvin Davidson <melvin6...@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Service outage: each
postgres process use the exact amount of th
From: Moreno Andreo [mailto:moreno.and...@evolu-s.it]
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 3:11 PM
To: Igor Neyman <iney...@perceptron.com>; Melvin Davidson <melvin6...@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Service outage: each postgres process use the e
To: Igor Neyman <iney...@perceptron.com>;
Melvin Davidson <melvin6...@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Service outage: each
postgres process use the exact amount of th
From: Moreno Andreo [mailto:moreno.and...@evolu-s.it]
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 3:00 PM
To: Igor Neyman <iney...@perceptron.com>; Melvin Davidson <melvin6...@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Service outage: each postgres process use the e
Il 14/04/2017 20:55, Melvin Davidson ha
scritto:
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:42 PM,
Chris Mair
wrote:
you should increase shared_memory to 40GB. General
Il 14/04/2017 20:40, Igor Neyman ha
scritto:
E. How many users were connected when
the problem occurred?
About 350 connections
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Chris Mair wrote:
> you should increase shared_memory to 40GB. General philosphy is to
>> allocate 80% of system memory to shared_memory
>>
>
> Uhm...
>
> 80% is too much, likely:
>
>
you should increase shared_memory to 40GB. General philosphy is to allocate 80%
of system memory to shared_memory
Uhm...
80% is too much, likely:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/runtime-config-resource.html
Bye,
Chris.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list
E. How many users were connected when the problem occurred?
About 350 connections
Thanks
__
Probably that is your problem, if you don’t have connection pooler.
I’d recommend to start with PgBouncer, very
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Moreno Andreo
wrote:
> Melvin,
> Sorry for top-posting.
> I'm going ahead in troubleshooting. As Jeff said, there's probably nothing
> wrong with my values (at the end of the message you can find minimal info
> you requested).
> I
Melvin,
Sorry for top-posting.
I'm going ahead in troubleshooting. As Jeff said, there's probably
nothing wrong with my values (at the end of the message you can
find minimal info you requested).
I tried running some queries against psql server and
Sorry,
my mistake (I'm a bit nervous...)
that's not work_mem, but shared_buffers
Hi.
The resident set size of the worker processes includes all shared memory blocks
they touched.
So it's not that each of those workers allocated their own 3GB...
(in Linux at least)
Bye,
Chris.
--
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Moreno Andreo
wrote:
> Hi all,
> About 2 hours and half ago, suddenly (and on the late afternoon of the
> Easter Friday), customers reported failing connections to our server, or
> even very slow.
> After a bit of checking (that also
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Moreno Andreo
wrote:
> Sorry,
> my mistake (I'm a bit nervous...)
>
> that's not work_mem, but shared_buffers
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Il 14/04/2017 19:33, Melvin Davidson ha scritto:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Moreno Andreo
Sorry,
my mistake (I'm a bit nervous...)
that's not work_mem, but shared_buffers
Thanks
Il 14/04/2017 19:33, Melvin Davidson ha scritto:
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:12 PM,
Moreno Andreo
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Moreno Andreo
wrote:
> Hi all,
> About 2 hours and half ago, suddenly (and on the late afternoon of the
> Easter Friday), customers reported failing connections to our server, or
> even very slow.
> After a bit of checking (that also
Hi all,
About 2 hours and half ago, suddenly (and on the late afternoon of
the Easter Friday), customers reported failing connections to our
server, or even very slow.
After a bit of checking (that also involved server reboot) I noticed
(using top) that every process
17 matches
Mail list logo