Dear List, Hmmm , lemme test efficacy of pg_tune. I would reduce shared buffers also. regarding concurrent queries: its now non business hours and SELECT procpid,current_query from pg_stat_activity where current_query not ilike '%idle%' ; is just 5-10, i am yet to measure it during business hours. Warm Regds Rajesh Kumar Mallah. On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Rajesh Kumar Mallah wrote: >> >> A scary phenomenon is being exhibited by the server , which is the server >> is slurping all the swap suddenly >> 8 1 4192912 906164 6100 27873640 0 0 2277 858 13440 16235 >> 63 8 19 10 0 >> >> I reduced work_mem from 4GB to 2GB to 512MB (now). I clearly remember that >> this >> abnormal consumption of swap was NOT there even when work_mem was 4GB. >> eg during happier times swap utilisation was: http://pastebin.com/bnE1pFZ9 >> the question is whats making postgres slurp the swap? i am posting my >> current postgresql.conf >> once again. >> >> # cat postgresql.conf | grep -v "^\s*#" | grep -v "^\s*$" >> listen_addresses = '*' # what IP address(es) to listen on; >> port = 5432 # (change requires restart) >> max_connections = 300 # (change requires restart) >> > > Hello Rajesh, > > In constrast with e.g. shared_buffers and effective_cache_size, work_mem is > amount of memory per 'thing' (e.g. order/group by) that wants some working > memory, so even a single backend can use several pieces of work_mem memory. > > Looking at your postgresql.conf, other memory values seem a bit too high as > well for a 32GB ram server. It is probably a good idea to use pgtune (on > pgfoundry) to get some reasonable ball park settings for your hardware. > > regards, > Yeb Havinga > > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
