Re: Used Memory

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: "Christian Paul B(dot) Cosinas" <cpc(at)cybees(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Used Memory
Date: 2005-10-24 03:14:20
Message-ID: 435C518C.8070505@paradise.net.nz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Christian Paul B. Cosinas wrote:
>
>
> Here is the result of “free” command” I am talking about.
>
> What does this result mean?
>

I seem to recall the Linux man page for 'free' being most
unenlightening, so have a look at:

http://gentoo-wiki.com/FAQ_Linux_Memory_Management

(For Gentoo, but should be applicable to RHEL).

The basic idea is that modern operating systems try to make as much use
of the memory as possible. Postgresql depends on this behavior - e.g. a
page that has previously been fetched from disk, will be cached, so it
can be read from memory next time, as this is faster(!)

>
>
> I just noticed that as long as the free memory in the first row (which
> is 55036 as of now) became low, the slower is the response of the
> database server.
>

Well, you could be swapping - what does the swap line of 'free' show then?

Also, how about posting your postgresql.conf (or just the non-default
parameters) to this list?

Some other stuff that could be relevant:

- Is the machine just a database server, or does it run (say) Apache + Php?
- When the slowdown is noticed, does this coincide with certain
activities - e.g, backup , daily maintenance, data load(!) etc.

regards

Mark

>
> I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
> http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html

Nope, not me either.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Edmonds 2005-10-24 03:58:09 performance of implicit join vs. explicit conditions on inet queries?
Previous Message Christian Paul B. Cosinas 2005-10-24 01:47:05 Re: Used Memory