From: | Igor Neyman <ineyman(at)perceptron(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ioana Danes <ioanasoftware(at)yahoo(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Running out of memory on vacuum |
Date: | 2013-05-14 15:06:25 |
Message-ID: | A76B25F2823E954C9E45E32FA49D70EC1B7CF021@mail.corp.perceptron.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ioana Danes [mailto:ioanasoftware(at)yahoo(dot)ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 10:30 AM
> To: Igor Neyman; PostgreSQL General
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Running out of memory on vacuum
>
> Hi Igor,
>
> 1. I could remove the nightly vacuum but I think that is not the
> cause. The vacuum is only catching the problem. If I ignore the vacuum
> message for few days the system is gonna run out of memory on
> queries...
> 2. There is no autovacuum running in the same time. I tried to run
> vacuum verbose manually and checked what else was going on on the
> server.
> I also reduced the maintenance work mem to 1 GB but I get the same
> error.
> 3.
> I do use connection pooling. I have 1500 terminals selling and at busy
> times I might need more than 100 active connections but just
> occationally...
>
> Thanks for quick response,
>
>
You still didn't explain, why do you need manual vacuuming.
You have autovacuum set "on", so it'll wake up every so often do its job based on other autovacuum config parameters.
What kind of connection pooling are you using?
Is it set for session pooling, or transaction, or statement pooling?
Having more than 100 active connections at a time does not mean that all of them executing queries at the same time.
Unless you have a lot of processor cores (and I mean a LOT!), it does not make sense to set pool at 180, even less so at 300.
Igor Neyman
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | S H | 2013-05-14 15:06:44 | Re: bloating vacuum |
Previous Message | bricklen | 2013-05-14 15:06:20 | Re: bloating vacuum |