pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Robert Kaye <rob@musicbrainz.org>
Cc: Josh Krupka <jkrupka@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: MusicBrainz postgres performance issues
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 14:50:22 +0100
Message-ID: <20150315135022.GC19792@alap3.anarazel.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9E71CCBE-4CDF-482E-878D-6C16027B6283@musicbrainz.org>
References: <B008F2EE-45D7-4535-9163-56A8CDCA553C@musicbrainz.org>
	<CAB6McgXxZdD6yuYRLg4tgDdhqzXKLs63aV+S_nOfZ9arSXUAhA@mail.gmail.com>
	<9E71CCBE-4CDF-482E-878D-6C16027B6283@musicbrainz.org>
List-Unsubscribe:  <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-performance>

On 2015-03-15 13:07:25 +0100, Robert Kaye wrote:
> 
> > On Mar 15, 2015, at 12:13 PM, Josh Krupka <jkrupka@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > It sounds like you've hit the postgres basics, what about some of the linux check list items?
> > 
> > what does free -m show on your db server?
> 
>              total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
> Mem:         48295      31673      16622          0          5      12670
> -/+ buffers/cache:      18997      29298
> Swap:        22852       2382      20470

Could you post /proc/meminfo instead? That gives a fair bit more
information.

Also:
* What hardware is this running on?
* Why do you need 500 connections (that are nearly all used) when you
  have a pgbouncer in front of the database? That's not going to be
  efficient.
* Do you have any data tracking the state connections are in?
  I.e. whether they're idle or not? The connections graph on you linked
  doesn't give that information?
* You're apparently not graphing CPU usage. How busy are the CPUs? How
  much time is spent in the kernel (i.e. system)?
* Consider installing perf (linux-utils-$something) and doing a
  systemwide profile.

3.2 isn't the greatest kernel around, efficiency wise. At some point you
might want to upgrade to something newer. I've seen remarkable
differences around this.

You really should upgrade postgres to a newer major version one of these
days. Especially 9.2. can give you a remarkable improvement in
performance with many connections in a read mostly workload.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance



view thread (41+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20150315135022.GC19792@alap3.anarazel.de>
Permalink:  ../20150315135022.GC19792@alap3.anarazel.de/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20150315135022.GC19792@alap3.anarazel.de

 · 

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
  Cc: andres@2ndquadrant.com, rob@musicbrainz.org, jkrupka@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: MusicBrainz postgres performance issues
  In-Reply-To: <20150315135022.GC19792@alap3.anarazel.de>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox