Re: High load average in 64-core server , no I/O wait and CPU is idle

From: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: "Rajesh Kumar(dot) Mallah" <mallah(at)tradeindia(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: High load average in 64-core server , no I/O wait and CPU is idle
Date: 2012-05-24 21:30:19
Message-ID: CAGTBQpaq6F0JTP6tk2meCsBxHaiMkX65QgVRkR0BqtqzohL1Tw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> * Rajesh Kumar. Mallah (mallah(at)tradeindia(dot)com) wrote:
>> We are running linux with kernel 3.2.X
>> (which has the lseek improvements)
>
> Ah, good.
>
>> Thanks for the reference , even i thought so (LockManager) ,
>> but we are actually also running out db max connections (also)
>> ( which is currently at 600) , when that happens  something at
>> the beginning of the application stack also gets dysfunctional and it
>> changes the very input to the system. ( think of negative feedback systems )
>
> Oh.  Yeah, have you considered pgbouncer?

Or pooling at the application level. Many ORMs support connection
pooling and limiting out-of-the-box.

In essence, postgres should never bounce connections, it should all be
handled by the application or a previous pgbouncer, both of which
would do it more efficient and effectively.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2012-05-25 03:20:34 Re: pg_dump and thousands of schemas
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2012-05-24 21:24:47 Re: heavly load system spec