| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Radcon Entec <radconentec(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Controlling proliferation of postgres.exe processes |
| Date: | 2009-06-23 23:42:15 |
| Message-ID: | 407d949e0906231642x373f90fdx457785e120cb216c@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> In response to Radcon Entec <radconentec(at)yahoo(dot)com>:
>> At the current moment, our customer's computer has 22 instances of postgres.exe running. When a colleague checked a few minutes ago, there were 29. Our contract specifies that we cannot consume more than 40% of the computer's memory, and we're over that level.
Keep in mind the Postgres uses shared memory, so make sure not to
count the shared memory segment (set by the shared_buffers
configuration value) repeatedly for every process. I'm not sure which
Windows tools make it clear this shared memory is the same and which
might make it appear to belong to every process.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2009-06-24 02:07:29 | Re: Replication |
| Previous Message | Scott Mead | 2009-06-23 23:40:21 | Re: Controlling proliferation of postgres.exe processes |