Re: 13.4 on RDS, SSL SYSCALL EOF on restore

What if you use a bigger instance (and maybe provisioned IO, too) just for
the time it takes to restore the database, and then modify it down to a
"production sized" instance?

On 10/9/21 1:20 PM, Wells Oliver wrote:
> Thanks all. Reducing maintenance_work_mem to 1GB and keeping
> shared_buffers at 4GB did allow the restore to complete. It took ~770m
> with 16 processes and that configuration, but only ~500m with
> maintenance_work_mem at 2GB, shared_buffers at 4GB, and 8 processes. Of
> course, with maintenance_work_mem at 2GB and 16 processes, we ran out of
> memory and kaboom.
>
> If anyone has any more parameter values I should try to improve on that
> restore time, I'd love to hear them.
>
> Thanks for the help here.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 3:48 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org
> <mailto:alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>> wrote:
>
> On 2021-Oct-08, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > On 2021-Oct-08, Wells Oliver wrote:
> >
> > > Dug out some more logging:
> >
> > > 2021-10-08 20:35:08 UTC::@:[12682]:LOG:  server process (PID 3970)
> was terminated by signal 9: Killed
> > > 2021-10-08 20:35:08 UTC::@:[12682]:DETAIL:  Failed process was
> running: CREATE INDEX ...
> >
> > So what's happening here is that the instance is running out of RAM
> > while creating some index, and the kernel is killing the process.  I
> > would probably blame the combination of shared_buffers=4GB with
> > maintenance_work_mem=2GB, together with the instance's total RAM.
>
> Also, maybe RDS could be smarter about this situation.
>
> --
> Álvaro Herrera              Valdivia, Chile  —
> https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ <https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/>
> "La primera ley de las demostraciones en vivo es: no trate de usar el
> sistema.
> Escriba un guión que no toque nada para no causar daños." (Jakob Nielsen)
>
>
>
> --
> Wells Oliver
> wells(dot)oliver(at)gmail(dot)com <mailto:wellsoliver(at)gmail(dot)com>

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.