Still problems with memory swapping and server load - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Markus Wollny |
---|---|
Subject | Still problems with memory swapping and server load |
Date | |
Msg-id | 2266D0630E43BB4290742247C8910575014CE2A6@dozer.computec.de Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
Re: Still problems with memory swapping and server load
Re: Still problems with memory swapping and server load Re: Still problems with memory swapping and server load Re: Still problems with memory swapping and server load |
List | pgsql-general |
Hi! I'm still "being hosed over big time" as Curt Sampson put it. It's still the same machine and database: 1GB RAM, 4xPIII550Xeon, dumpall.sql is ~300MB (see "[GENERAL] Urgent: Tuning strategies?"). It all starts with a humble 8MB swap being used (I expect that's just the empty swap with nothing in it but some system overhead). Then after a short time, memory usage climbs slow but continuously until it hits physical RAM ceiling and starts using swap - with not very nice results for the database. Swap sometimes amounts to 200MB or more. I altered postgresql.conf-settings as recommended: max_connections = 128 shared_buffers = 32768 sort_mem = 8192 (16384 or 32768 didn't help either) wal_files = 32 wal_buffers = 32 fsync = false Everything else is commented out resp. on default settings. This is what top gives me: 2:41pm up 6 days, 3:51, 3 users, load average: 4.41, 2.71, 1.89 114 processes: 105 sleeping, 9 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped CPU0 states: 60.2% user, 14.3% system, 0.0% nice, 24.5% idle CPU1 states: 81.0% user, 14.5% system, 0.0% nice, 4.0% idle CPU2 states: 77.0% user, 12.3% system, 0.0% nice, 10.2% idle CPU3 states: 71.1% user, 13.3% system, 0.0% nice, 15.0% idle Mem: 1029400K av, 1023264K used, 6136K free, 0K shrd, 7176K buff Swap: 2097136K av, 49656K used, 2047480K free 819052K cached PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND 6848 postgres 16 0 247M 247M 246M R 93.6 24.6 4:06 postmaster 6928 postgres 9 0 13836 13M 13016 S 25.8 1.3 0:13 postmaster 6926 postgres 9 0 14572 14M 13756 S 23.8 1.4 0:13 postmaster 6920 postgres 10 0 14296 13M 13476 R 21.1 1.3 0:13 postmaster 6874 postgres 9 0 49408 48M 43168 S 19.8 4.7 3:57 postmaster 6911 postgres 9 0 66840 65M 65728 S 19.4 6.4 0:01 postmaster 6917 postgres 9 0 9108 9104 8204 R 19.4 0.8 0:13 postmaster 6875 postgres 11 0 41564 40M 35324 R 18.7 4.0 3:31 postmaster 6927 postgres 10 0 14148 13M 13328 R 17.4 1.3 0:12 postmaster 6889 postgres 9 0 24844 24M 23632 S 15.8 2.4 0:17 postmaster 6903 postgres 12 0 204M 204M 203M R 10.2 20.3 0:27 postmaster 6837 postgres 9 0 251M 251M 250M S 9.8 25.0 0:37 postmaster 5929 postgres 15 0 940 884 668 R 8.9 0.0 8:23 top 6934 root 16 0 976 976 732 R 8.0 0.0 0:07 top 6852 postgres 9 0 227M 227M 226M R 7.8 22.6 0:12 postmaster 6897 postgres 9 0 14988 14M 13948 S 6.0 1.4 0:01 postmaster 6838 postgres 9 0 18364 17M 17304 S 5.6 1.7 0:04 postmaster 6845 postgres 9 0 52344 51M 50916 S 3.6 5.0 0:09 postmaster 6834 postgres 9 0 25456 24M 24356 S 3.0 2.4 0:26 postmaster 6894 postgres 9 0 247M 247M 246M S 2.1 24.6 0:27 postmaster 6907 postgres 9 0 16020 15M 14992 S 1.8 1.5 0:03 postmaster 6904 postgres 9 0 16604 16M 15528 S 1.0 1.6 0:13 postmaster 4799 root 9 0 1820 1444 1300 S 0.1 0.1 0:07 sshd 6893 postgres 9 0 18396 17M 17332 S 0.1 1.7 0:07 postmaster 6916 postgres 9 0 8940 8936 8020 S 0.1 0.8 0:08 postmaster cat /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax is 323380838 and ipcs -m returns: ------ Shared Memory Segments -------- key shmid owner perms bytes nattch status 0x00000000 32768 root 600 1056768 3 dest 0x00000000 98305 root 600 33554432 3 dest 0x00000000 131074 wwwrun 600 368644 3 dest 0x0052e2c1 2457603 postgres 600 274554880 54 0x07021999 229380 root 644 1104 2 Any ideas? Some other way out than "get more RAM"? How effective can I expect more RAM to be in my situation - wouldn't it just clutter up and overflow into swap like the first 1GB? How come system-processingtime gets so high? I followed the other suggestions and tracked slow queries using logging - now there's hardly anything left with >0.5s execution time elapsed, but the backends still seem to run amok. As always very greatful for any help. Regardy, Markus
pgsql-general by date: