From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Igor Polishchuk <ipolishchuk(at)hi5(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Is IDLE session really idle? |
Date: | 2009-06-15 21:13:00 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10906151413u7c295e0cndb8562b849441823@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Igor Polishchuk<ipolishchuk(at)hi5(dot)com> wrote:
> Hello everybody!
>
> I have many app servers using connection pooling. At any time, there are
> about 1000 total connection to the database from all the app servers;
> however, only few random connections are active.
> The application often executes relatively big sorts. The work_mem size is
> 32MB, and eventually many sessions have a chance to run a sort and allocate
> a big sort area. I see hundreds of postgres processes with DATA segment >
> 15MB.
> Eventually, it consumes all the available memory. Most of this memory is
> allocated to the sessions that are idle. I cannot change the connection
> pooling on the application side, and the big sorts cannot be eliminated. I
> need a solution on the DB side.
Could you post the commands and output you used to determine this? I
agree with Tom that you might be mis-measuring memory usage.
You do not mention your shared_memory size or total memory size. If
you've got say 16G of ram and 12 Gig of shared_memory, then it's quite
possible having touched all of shared_memory a pgsql backend will show
10 or 12 Gigs memory used. It's not actually independently using that
much, but some people freak when they see it the first time.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Igor Polishchuk | 2009-06-15 22:25:12 | Re: Is IDLE session really idle? |
Previous Message | Michael Monnerie | 2009-06-15 20:35:54 | Re: Is IDLE session really idle? |