| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postmaster processes running out of control? |
| Date: | 2002-03-21 23:02:53 |
| Message-ID: | 11785.1016751773@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 02:10:08PM +0000, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
>> (6.5.1 I think postgres, since upgraded to 7.2 on FreeBSD 3.3-STABLE)
>>
>> Why am I saying this? No idea. Just not sure why a 90MB footprint for a DB
>> backend would be so shocking.
> I think as someone else pointed out, it's probably all shared memory any and
> so may not be a problem. That doesn't solve your basic problem though.
Yeah, the number reported by ps should be viewed with suspicion until
you know for certain whether it counts the shared memory segment or not.
(In my experience, on some platforms it does and on some it doesn't.)
However, I think the real issue here is probably just 6.5's well known
problems with intra-query memory leaks. If Nigel can reproduce the
difficulty on 7.2 then I'd be more interested in looking into it...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2002-03-21 23:25:19 | Re: A general database question! |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2002-03-21 22:31:03 | Re: Postmaster processes running out of control? |