Thank you very much for your help, it's greatly appreciated.
At least I can now pinpoint the problem and search for a solution or
another reason to upgrade to 9.1 !
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Vincent Dautremont <vincent(at)searidgetech(dot)com> writes:
> > you were right,
> > I do see those CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION a bit more than 1 per second
> > (approx. 12 times for 10 seconds)
> Hah. Complain to the rubyrep people. It's most likely just a thinko
> about where they should issue that command. If they actually are
> changing the function text from one issuance to the next, they would be
> well advised to think of a better way to deal with whatever they're
> doing that for; it's going to be quite inefficient even without
> considering the effects of this leak.
> > I don't know a lot about the internal of rubyrep, but do you think this
> > not a normal behaviour from a postgresql server point of view ?
> It's not. We have plugged that leak, I think, as of 9.1; but the fact
> that it took us this long to notice the leak shows that constant
> replacement of a function is not a common usage. All the server's
> internal caching related to functions is designed around the assumption
> that functions aren't redefined too often.
> If you can't get the rubyrep people to fix their code, updating to PG
> 9.1 is a possible workaround.
> regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-admin by date
|Next:||From: Adam Fuchs||Date: 2012-05-24 21:31:57|
|Subject: PG_DUMP producing lots of WAL archive logs|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-05-23 21:33:29|
|Subject: Re: out of memory error |