| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hans-Jürgen Schönig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, eg(at)cybertec(dot)at |
| Subject: | Re: Is it a memory leak in PostgreSQL 7.4beta? |
| Date: | 2003-09-04 09:12:15 |
| Message-ID: | 3F5701EF.7020508@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hans,
You are right about the startup memory - here is the top line for a few
seconds after startup :
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+
COMMAND
10116 postgres 15 0 3816 3816 3180 R 33.8 1.0 0:01.03 postmaster
seems that VIRT, RES, SHR all get the increase counted against them as
time goes on (as Tom suggested, I guess its to do with how top does its
accounting on this platform).
Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote:
>
> I can hardly imagine that the backend started working with 9mb of
> memory. what did you do that PostgreSQL needed so much memory from the
> beginning??? are you using the default settings? usually the
> postmaster does not need more than 3mb at startup (in this scenario).
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joerg Hessdoerfer | 2003-09-04 12:11:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Win32 native port |
| Previous Message | Jeroen T. Vermeulen | 2003-09-04 08:59:35 | Re: Transaction status in default psql prompt? |