Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL grows to enormous size.

From: Peter T Mount <peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: "Ean R (dot) Schuessler" <ean(at)novare(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL grows to enormous size.
Date: 1998-10-17 13:51:32
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.3.96.981017144920.31130T-100000@maidast.retep.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Ean R . Schuessler wrote:

> I wrote a JDBC based web app that I had been using an older version of
> PostgreSQL and recently updated it to 6.3.2. In my new install PostgreSQL
> will grow to enormous sizes (+100M) and then shrink back down without
> any regard to the intensity of queries hitting it. Oddly, beating the snot
> out of the server with lots of queries does _not_ seem to make the server
> grow. It only shows the behaivior when it is getting hit by real net
> connections. There are several other new elements involved (new libc6, new
> Apache, new JServ, etc) but I am befoggulated by the memory growth of
> PostgreSQL. Running Postmaster with -d 2 doesn't indicate anything
> special when the memory bounces up and down and -d 3 proved too much for
> my tiny brain pan.

I ran a test earlier in the week, and saw a similar problem. It doesn't
look like JDBC's fault, as I got similar results using copy in psql.

I haven't had chance to look at it deeper, as I've been finishing off the
JDBC documentation.

> I am thouroughly confused and don't really know where to start to try
> and debug the problem.

What version of postgresql were you using before you upgraded?

Peter

--
Peter T Mount peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk
Main Homepage: http://www.retep.org.uk
PostgreSQL JDBC Faq: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgres
Java PDF Generator: http://www.retep.org.uk/pdf

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Ivar Helbekkmo 1998-10-17 15:10:12 Re: [HACKERS] Did the inet type get backed out?
Previous Message Vladimir Litovka 1998-10-17 13:19:15 Is this BUG or FEATURE?