On Nov 14, 2006, at 1:11 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On 11/14/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:17:08AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 11/14/06, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I must say I lowered "shared_buffers" to 8192, as it was before.
>
On Tue, 2006-11-14 at 09:17 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 11/14/06, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I must say I lowered "shared_buffers" to 8192, as it was before.
> > I tried raising it to 16384, but I can't seem to find a relationship
> > between shared_buffers and performanc
Merlin wrote:
On 11/14/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:17:08AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 11/14/06, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I must say I lowered "shared_buffers" to 8192, as it was before.
> >I tried raising it to 16384, but
On 11/14/06, Jim C. Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:17:08AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 11/14/06, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I must say I lowered "shared_buffers" to 8192, as it was before.
> >I tried raising it to 16384, but I can't seem to f
> a) order Opterons. That doesn't solve the overload problem as such,
> but these pesky cs storms seems to have gone away this way.
I haven't run into context switch storms or similar issues with the new
Intel Woodcrests (yet.. they're still pretty new and not yet under real
production load), has
On 11/14/06, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I must say I lowered "shared_buffers" to 8192, as it was before.
I tried raising it to 16384, but I can't seem to find a relationship
between shared_buffers and performance level for this server.
My findings are pretty much the same here.
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:17:08AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 11/14/06, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I must say I lowered "shared_buffers" to 8192, as it was before.
> >I tried raising it to 16384, but I can't seem to find a relationship
> >between shared_buffers and perfor
* Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [061114 10:52]:
> Richard Huxton wrote:
> >Cosimo Streppone wrote:
> >>Richard Huxton wrote:
> >>
> The average context switching for this server as vmstat shows is 1
> but when the problem occurs it goes to 25.
> >>>
> >>I seem to have the same ex
Richard Huxton wrote:
Cosimo Streppone wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
The average context switching for this server as vmstat shows is 1
but when the problem occurs it goes to 25.
I seem to have the same exact behaviour for an OLTP-loaded 8.0.1 server
upgrade from 8.0.1 - the most recen
Andreas Kostyrka wrote:
The solution for us has been twofold:
upgrade to the newest PG version available at the time while we waited
for our new Opteron-based DB hardware to arrive.
Do you remember the exact Pg version?
--
Cosimo
---(end of broadcast)---
Am Freitag, den 03.11.2006, 14:38 + schrieb Richard Huxton:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> If you can keep your numbers of clients down below the critical
> >> level, you should find the overall workload is fine.
> >
> > We have at about 600 connections. Is this a case to use a connection
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> And why this happens only with 8.0 and 8.1 and not with the 7.4?
8.0 and 8.1 are vulnerable to this behavior because of conflicts for
access to pg_subtrans (which didn't exist in 7.4). The problem occurs
when you have old open transactions, causing the window over whic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you can keep your numbers of clients down below the critical
level, you should find the overall workload is fine.
We have at about 600 connections. Is this a case to use a connection
pool (pg_pool) system?
Possibly - that should help. I'm assuming that most of your
> If you can keep your numbers of clients down below the critical > level, > you should find the overall workload is fine.
We have at about 600 connections. Is this a case to use a connection pool (pg_pool) system?
And why this happens only with 8.0 and 8.1 and not with the 7.4?
Richard Huxton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
We've migrated one of our servers from pg 7.4 to 8.1 and from times
to times (4 hours) the server start doing a lot of context switching
and all transactions become very slow.
The average context switching for this server as vmstat shows is 1
Richard Troy wrote:
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Richard Huxton wrote:
It's memory bandwidth issues on the older Xeons. If you search the
archives you'll see a lot of discussion of this. I'd have thought 8.1
would be better than 7.4 though.
Hmmm... I just checked; one of our production systems is a mul
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Richard Huxton wrote:
>
> It's memory bandwidth issues on the older Xeons. If you search the
> archives you'll see a lot of discussion of this. I'd have thought 8.1
> would be better than 7.4 though.
Hmmm... I just checked; one of our production systems is a multi-cpu Xeon
bas
The solution for us has been twofold:
upgrade to the newest PG version available at the time while we waited
for our new Opteron-based DB hardware to arrive.
Andreas
Am Freitag, den 03.11.2006, 13:29 + schrieb Richard Huxton:
> Cosimo Streppone wrote:
> > Richard Huxton wrote:
> >
> >> [EM
Cosimo Streppone wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The average context switching for this server as vmstat shows is 1
but when the problem occurs it goes to 25.
You'll tend to see it when you have multiple clients and most queries
can use RAM rather than disk I/O. M
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
We've migrated one of our servers from pg 7.4 to 8.1 and from times
to times (4 hours) the server start doing a lot of context switching
and all transactions become very slow.
The average context switching for this server as vmstat shows is 1
but when the problem oc
rg
Cc:
Subject:[PERFORM] Context switch storm
Hi,
We've migrated one of our servers from pg 7.4 to 8.1 and from times to times (4
hours) the server start doing a lot of context switching and all transactions
become very slow.
The average context switching for this server
Hi,
We've migrated one of our servers from pg 7.4 to 8.1 and from times to times (4 hours) the server start doing a lot of context switching and all transactions become very slow.
The average context switching for this server as vmstat shows is 1 but when the problem occurs it goes to 25.
22 matches
Mail list logo
