ith vacuum. We only have a
full server vacuum once a day.
-Original Message-
From: Mark Kirkwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 3:14 AM
To: Christian Paul B. Cosinas
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Used Memory
>
>
> I just n
PM
To: Jon Brisbin
Cc:
pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Used Memory
[snip]
to the second processor in my dual Xeon eServer) has got me to the
point that the perpetually high memory usage doesn't affect my
application server.
I'm curious - how doe
Here are the configuration of our database server:
port = 5432
max_connections = 300
superuser_reserved_connections = 10
authentication_timeout = 60
shared_buffers = 48000
sort_mem = 32168
sync = false
Do you think this is enough? Or
Christian Paul B. Cosinas wrote:
Hi mark
I have so many functions, more than 100 functions in the database :) And I
am dealing about 3 million of records in one database.
And about 100 databases :)
LOL - sorry, mis-understood your previous message to mean you had
identified *one* query where
Paul B. Cosinas
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Used Memory
Christian Paul B. Cosinas wrote:
> Hi To all those who replied. Thank You.
>
> I monitor my database server a while ago and found out that memory is
> used extensively when I am fetching records from
Christian Paul B. Cosinas wrote:
Hi To all those who replied. Thank You.
I monitor my database server a while ago and found out that memory is used
extensively when I am fetching records from the database. I use the command
"fetch all" in my VB Code and put it in a recordset.Also in this command
erformance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Used Memory
Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>What's needed is a way for the application developer to explicitely
>>say, "This object is frequenly used, and I want it kept in memory."
>
> There's an interesting conversation happe
Scott Marlowe wrote:
What's needed is a way for the application developer to explicitely say,
"This object is frequenly used, and I want it kept in memory."
There's an interesting conversation happening on the linux kernel
hackers mailing list right about now that applies:
http://www.gossamer
On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 12:00, Craig A. James wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > In addition to what Mark pointed out, there is the possibility that a
> > query
> > is running which is scanning a large table or otherwise bringing in a
> > large number of pages from disk. That would first use up all
Kevin Grittner wrote:
In addition to what Mark pointed out, there is the possibility that a
query
is running which is scanning a large table or otherwise bringing in a
large number of pages from disk. That would first use up all available
unused cache space, and then may start replacing some of
In addition to what Mark pointed out, there is the possibility that a
query
is running which is scanning a large table or otherwise bringing in a
large number of pages from disk. That would first use up all available
unused cache space, and then may start replacing some of your
frequently used dat
Christian Paul B. Cosinas wrote:
Here is the result of “free” command” I am talking about.
What does this result mean?
I seem to recall the Linux man page for 'free' being most
unenlightening, so have a look at:
http://gentoo-wiki.com/FAQ_Linux_Memory_Management
(For Gentoo, but should
total used free shared
buffers cached
Mem: 6192460 6137424
55036 0 85952 5828844
-/+ buffers/cache:
[snip]to the second processor in my dual Xeon eServer) has got me to thepoint that the perpetually high memory usage doesn't affect my
application server.
I'm curious - how does the high memory usage affect your application server?
Alex
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:40:47 -
"Christian Paul B. Cosinas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But after a number of access to the tables the memory is being used
> and it is not being free up. Actually after this access to the
> database and the server is just idle
I noticed this behavior on my S
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Used Memory
--On Freitag, Oktober 21, 2005 03:40:47 + "Christian Paul B. Cosinas"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am having a confusion to the memory handling of postgreSQL.
> I rebooted my Server which is a PostgreSQL 8.0 Running on Redhat 9,
:23 AM
To: Christian Paul B. Cosinas; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Used Memory
--On Freitag, Oktober 21, 2005 03:40:47 + "Christian Paul B. Cosinas"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am having a confusion to the memory handling of postgreSQL.
> I re
--On Freitag, Oktober 21, 2005 03:40:47 + "Christian Paul B. Cosinas"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am having a confusion to the memory handling of postgreSQL.
I rebooted my Server which is a PostgreSQL 8.0 Running on Redhat 9, which
is a Dual Xeon Server and 6 gig of memory.
Of course there
HI!
I am having a confusion to the memory
handling of postgreSQL.
Here is the Scenario.
I rebooted my Server which is a PostgreSQL
8.0 Running on Redhat 9, which is a Dual Xeon Server and 6 gig of memory.
Of course there is not much memory still
used since it is just restarted.
B
19 matches
Mail list logo
