Re: Large database help

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: xbdelacour(at)yahoo(dot)com
Cc: Ragnar Kjørstad <postgres(at)ragnark(dot)vestdata(dot)no>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Large database help
Date: 2001-04-24 00:24:16
Message-ID: 24501.988071856@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

xbdelacour(at)yahoo(dot)com writes:
> I'm no Unix expert, but this would seem to indicate that shmget is
> successfully allocating 400385024/1024/1024=381MB of shared memory. I don't
> know enough about how the postgres parent/child/shmem scheme works to know
> why this is working yet the children only register 12MB of shared memory
> under top.

On most of the systems I've worked on, top does not seem to count shmem
blocks that a process is attached to in the process' memory usage. So
that doesn't prove much one way or the other.

I am wondering if your version of 'top' fails to count swapped-out shmem
segments against swap space, or something like that. That'd be a tad
weird, but it seems very improbable that your machine is not swapping;
I just do not believe top's claim that no swapping is happening.

Anyway, the most direct experiment would be to reduce your -B request to
100MB or so and see how things change...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ragnar Kjørstad 2001-04-24 00:31:30 Re: Large database help
Previous Message xbdelacour 2001-04-24 00:15:05 Re: Large database help