Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Linux server connection process consumes all memory

From: Ioannis Anagnostopoulos <ioannis(at)anatec(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org, ahodgson(at)simkin(dot)ca
Subject: Re: Linux server connection process consumes all memory
Date: 2011-12-07 09:24:38
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-novice
On 06/12/2011 17:10, Tom Lane wrote:
> Merlin Moncure<mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>  writes:
>> *) You may want to consider changing your vm over commit settings
>> and/or reducing swap in order to get your server to more aggressively
>> return OOM to postgres memory allocation.  The specific error returned
>> to postgres for an OOM of course would be very helpful.
> Yeah.  I would try starting the postmaster under smaller ulimit settings
> so that the kernel gives it ENOMEM before you start getting swapped.
> When that happens, the backend will dump a memory map into the
> postmaster log that would be very useful for seeing what is actually
> happening here.
> 			regards, tom lane
Hello all,

I think I have solved the problem. Many thanks for the support and the 
time you spend. The solution/bug/problem is as follows:

1. There was one connection that as I described was used IN A LOOP 
22million times. This connection was assigned a PID x (on the linux server)
2. Nested within this LOOP there was another connection that had been 
forgotten from past code and the linux server was assigning to it a PID y
3. PID y was of course called also 22million times (since it was in the 
loop). However it had a nasty bug and it was creating constantly 
prepared commands! (opps my mistake). So PID y was creating 22million 
prepared commands!
4. As I had no clue that that there was at all PID y, monitoring the TOP 
on the server I was presented with the misbehaving PID y but I was of 
the impression that it was PID x. In fact PID x was below in the list 
happy doing its own job.

So the healthy PID X had a top signature as follows (please note the 
difference between RES and SHR as well as the magnitude in Mb as Merlin 
30475 postgres  20   0 2187m 746m 741m S   31  9.5   0:41.48 postgres

While the unhealthy PID Y had a TOP signature (please note that RES 
memory is at 12.9g! and SHR 1.4g as well as the magnitude in Gb!):
15965 postgres 20 0 12.9g 6.4g 1.4g S 11 83.4 13:59.15 postgres

As I said I had no clue about the existence of PID Y and since it was 
coming top at the TOP list I had wrongfully assumed that it was the PID 
X. It gets more complicated by the fact that the test code I sent you, 
which should have been working fine as it had no nested buggy loop, was 
mainly running from home over the DSL line thus I never let it conclude 
its 22million iterations (it would have been still running!) instead I 
was monitoring the TOP and since the memory was going UP I was 
wrongfully assuming that I had the same issue (if I had let it run for 2 
-3 hours I would have noticed what Merlin suggested about RES/SHR 
ratio). So it was a misdiagnosis after all :)

I hope this explains everything.
Kind Regards and sorry for the misunderstanding.

In response to


pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Pandu PoluanDate: 2011-12-07 11:23:56
Subject: Re: Linux server connection process consumes all memory
Previous:From: Pandu PoluanDate: 2011-12-07 09:18:17
Subject: Re: How to add description for databases and tables?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group