Re: [GENERAL] leaking FD's ?

From: Michael Simms <grim(at)argh(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian)
Cc: grim(at)argh(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk (Michael Simms), pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] leaking FD's ?
Date: 1999-10-05 19:05:57
Message-ID: 199910051905.UAA28039@argh.demon.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> > Hi
> >
> > I am running a process that does a fair number of selects and updates but
> > nothing too complex.
> >
> > I have the postmaster starting like such:
> >
> > /usr/bin/postmaster -o "-F -S 10240" -d 1 -N 128 -B 256 -D/var/lib/pgsql/data -o -F > /tmp/postmasterout 2> /tmp/postmastererr
> >
> > Now, looking at that, I have 256 shared memory segments, and as such,
> > I would expect the number of file descriptors used by my backends to
> > be fairly similar.
>
> Each backend keeps up to 64(?) file descriptors open, expecting it may
> need to access those files in the future, so it uses it as a cache.

Thats fine, except for, as I stated, I was up to 480 at time of writing. As
time progressed, the number of FDs open maxed out at 1022, which considering
I have a max of 1024 per process seems to say to me that it was leaking.
Especially as it became increasingly slower as it went after hitting 1022
which to me indicates that, as you say, it held fd's open for caching, but
when it reached its fd limit and still leaked, it had less and less free fds
to play with.

Sound like a leak to anyone?

~Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Paul Sheer 1999-10-05 19:21:33 An easier way to get the type of a column?
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 1999-10-05 18:55:55 Re: [GENERAL] what happened to pgaccess under 6.5.2?