From: | John Sidney-Woollett <johnsw(at)wardbrook(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Memory Leakage Problem |
Date: | 2005-12-14 13:52:00 |
Message-ID: | 43A02380.6070203@wardbrook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
Martijn
Thanks for the tip.
Since the connections on this server are from slon, I'm hoping that they
hand around for a *long* time, and long enough to take a look to see
what is going on.
John
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 04:37:42PM -0000, John Sidney-Woollett wrote:
>
>>I'll run this over the next few days and especially as the server starts
>>bogging down to see if it identifies the culprit.
>>
>>Is it possible to grab memory outsize of a processes space? Or would a
>>leak always show up by an ever increasing VSZ amount?
>
>
> The only way to know what a process can access is by looking in
> /proc/<pid>/maps. This lists all the memory ranges a process can
> access. The thing about postgres is that each backend dies when the
> connection closes, so only a handful of processes are going to be
> around long enough to cause a problem.
>
> The ones you need to look at are the number of mappings with a
> zero-inode excluding the shared memory segment. A diff between two days
> might tell you which segments are growing. Must be for exactly the same
> process to be meaningful.
>
> Have a nice day,
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | hubert depesz lubaczewski | 2005-12-14 14:02:48 | outdated (bad) information in pg_stat_activity |
Previous Message | Jerry LeVan | 2005-12-14 13:49:36 | ANN: PgBrowse 1.4 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-12-14 15:26:53 | Re: Convert IN sublink to join |
Previous Message | francisco.santos | 2005-12-14 13:27:21 | Convert IN sublink to join |