From: alexandre - aldeia digital <adaldeia@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Adding more memory = hugh cpu load
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:54:03 -0300
Message-ID: <4E933F4B.2080808@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E92E9340200002500041CD5@gw.wicourts.gov>
References: <4E92F294.9010405@gmail.com>
<4E92FB87.1030703@peak6.com>
<4E932BFC.7070007@gmail.com>
<4E92E9340200002500041CD5@gw.wicourts.gov>
Em 10-10-2011 14:46, Kevin Grittner escreveu:
> alexandre - aldeia digital<adaldeia@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Notice that we have no idle % in cpu column.
>
> So they're making full use of all the CPUs they paid for. That in
> itself isn't a problem. Unfortunately you haven't given us nearly
> enough information to know whether there is indeed a problem, or if
> so, what. What was throughput before? What is it now? How has
> latency been affected? And all those unanswered questions from my
> first email....
>
> The problem *might* be something along the lines of most of the
> discussion on the thread. It might not be. I just don't know yet,
> myself.
From the point of view of the client, the question is simple: until the
last friday (with 16 GB of RAM), the load average of server rarely
surpasses 4. Nothing change in normal database use.
Tonight, we will remove the extra memory. :/
Best regards.
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: adaldeia@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Adding more memory = hugh cpu load
In-Reply-To: <4E933F4B.2080808@gmail.com>
* 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