On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 07:09:46AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Will try this option, at least in the next schema upgrade or when setting up
Slony.
As I've already suggested, however, if you try to set up slony on a
loaded database, you're going to see all manner of problems. Slony
takes some
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 02:23:43AM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:41:36AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Just started INIT cluster Slonik command and that spiked too.. for more than
10 minutes now!!
Are you attempting to do Slony changes (such as install Slony) on
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 07:09:46AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Will try this option, at least in the next schema upgrade or when setting
up
Slony.
As I've already suggested, however, if you try to set up slony on a
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 02:41:55AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
I am aware of the heavy locking involved with Slony, which should mean that
it blocks the application connections; that's be completely acceptable,
given all the warnings in the Slony docs. But what I am concerned about and
trying
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 02:41:55AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
I am aware of the heavy locking involved with Slony, which should mean that
it blocks the application connections; that's be completely acceptable,
given all the warnings in the Slony docs.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:41:36AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
Just started INIT cluster Slonik command and that spiked too.. for more than
10 minutes now!!
Are you attempting to do Slony changes (such as install Slony) on an
active database? I strongly encourage you to read the Slony
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:15:42AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
During these spikes, in the 'top'
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 7:15 PM, David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:15:42AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All,
I have been perplexed by random load spikes on an 8.1.11 instance. many
a times they are random, in the sense we cannot tie a particular scenario as
the cause for it! But a few times we can see that when we are executing huge
scripts, which include DDL as well as DML, the load on the
Just an addition... the strace o/p with selects timing out just runs almost
continuously, it doesn't seem to pause anywhere!
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi All,
I have been perplexed by random load spikes on an 8.1.11 instance. many
a times
Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
During these spikes, in the 'top' sessions we see the 'idle' PG
processes consuming between 2 and 5 % CPU, and since the box has 8 CPUS (2
sockets and each CPU is a quad core Intel Xeon processors) and somewhere
around 200 Postgres processes, the
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
During these spikes, in the 'top' sessions we see the 'idle' PG
processes consuming between 2 and 5 % CPU, and since the box has 8 CPUS
(2
sockets and each CPU is a quad core
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
During these spikes, in the 'top' sessions we see the 'idle' PG
processes consuming between 2 and 5 % CPU,
Gurjeet Singh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Can you please elaborate on what high level diagnosis would you need?
Well, we'd need some idea of which spinlock is being contended for...
I just ran DROP SCHEMA _slony schema CASCADE; and it spiked again, on a
very low loaded box!!
That *might* mean
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:05:33AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
I just ran DROP SCHEMA _slony schema CASCADE; and it spiked again, on a
very low loaded box!!
Ah, well, if slony is involved, then you have possible locking
problems in the database _also_ to contend with, along with the
spinlock
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:05:33AM +0530, Gurjeet Singh wrote:
I just ran DROP SCHEMA _slony schema CASCADE; and it spiked again, on a
very low loaded box!!
Ah, well, if slony is involved, then you have possible
16 matches
Mail list logo
