From: | Matthew Chambers <mchambers(at)wetafx(dot)co(dot)nz> |
---|---|
To: | bricklen <bricklen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: high throughput 9.3, master/slave question |
Date: | 2014-03-06 20:41:39 |
Message-ID: | 5318DD83.4060908@wetafx.co.nz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 02/03/14 05:08, bricklen wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Matthew Chambers
> <mchambers(at)wetafx(dot)co(dot)nz <mailto:mchambers(at)wetafx(dot)co(dot)nz>> wrote:
>
>
> Initially, I had my application servers using the slave for short,
> read only queries, but this turned out to be highly unstable. The
> slave would start refusing connections, and the logs would fill with:
>
> ERROR: canceling statement due to conflict with recovery
>
> I've tried these 2 settings:
>
> max_standby_archive_delay = -1
> max_standby_streaming_delay = -1
>
> But then I starting getting these:
> DETAIL: User transaction caused buffer deadlock with recovery.
>
> Read requests come in at anywhere between 200 and 1000/second.
>
> I was wondering if there is some combination of configuration
> settings that would safely let me use the slave for read only queries?
>
>
> Have you tried setting max_standby_archive|streaming_delay to several
> minutes (or whatever makes sense for your typical query durations),
> rather than disabling those settings with -1?
No, I have not tired this, but I'll give it a go. Is there anyone doing
this that has a configuration I can check out? Is this even possible to do?
-Matt
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Johnston | 2014-03-06 21:43:44 | Re: Mysterious DB reset |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2014-03-06 19:34:24 | Re: Mysterious DB reset |