Re: How to cripple a postgres server - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: How to cripple a postgres server
Date
Msg-id 295.1022559884@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: How to cripple a postgres server  (Stephen Robert Norris <srn@commsecure.com.au>)
Responses Re: How to cripple a postgres server
Re: How to cripple a postgres server
Re: How to cripple a postgres server
List pgsql-general
Stephen Robert Norris <srn@commsecure.com.au> writes:
> One big difference, though, is that with the vacuum problem, the CPU
> used is almost all (99%) system time; loading up the db with lots of
> queries increases user time mostly, with little system time...

Hmm, that's a curious point; leaves one wondering about possible kernel
bugs.

> In any event, it seems a bug that merely having connections open causes
> this problem! They aren't even in transactions...

If the problem is that you've launched far more backends than the system
can really support, I'd have no hesitation in writing it off as user
error.  "Idle" processes are not without cost.  But at this point
I can't tell whether that's the case, or whether you're looking at a
genuine performance bug in either Postgres or the kernel.

Can you run strace (or truss or kernel-call-tracer-of-your-choice) on
the postmaster, and also on one of the putatively idle backends, so
we can see some more data about what's happening?

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Robert Norris
Date:
Subject: Re: How to cripple a postgres server
Next
From: Ron Snyder
Date:
Subject: Re: Invalid length of startup packet