Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9758DB5DBDE for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:34:56 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08864-02 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 20:34:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0-rc2 Received: from mail-yw0-f46.google.com (mail-yw0-f46.google.com [209.85.213.46]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E996B5DBDB for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:34:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: by ywb5 with SMTP id 5so5757447ywb.19 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:34:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IcD8JtL4zOHJHZ6Qoj9PdEYd+TLUgVsiNliqdaRJwwk=; b=LJSEmfLHlMN1UTJ8iXXu5b3/pf6IrvklXTofQtBbw4t0seDKYbG1KRUsLY9eoqSkF8 5Tm/S4YlKX/SXKjsDhbIZlRvn4ZnFNnzL7foF0JxZPtVMEqnXnNLH52NFeoeSE3wBSnJ 2A2s+Pz0FVP7sv0BwPJfmrfYMj3LVmFYIcPtQ= Received: by 10.150.31.5 with SMTP id e5mr1799170ybe.13.1318278887678; Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.125] ([177.35.194.80]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v20sm55400519anv.17.2011.10.10.13.34.46 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E9356E5.6000308@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:34:45 -0300 From: alexandre - aldeia digital User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Adding more memory = hugh cpu load References: <4E92F294.9010405@gmail.com> <4E92FB87.1030703@peak6.com> <4E932BFC.7070007@gmail.com> <4E92E9340200002500041CD5@gw.wicourts.gov> <4E933F4B.2080808@gmail.com> <4E9303A00200002500041CFE@gw.wicourts.gov> In-Reply-To: <4E9303A00200002500041CFE@gw.wicourts.gov> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.868 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL=0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201110/89 X-Sequence-Number: 45311 Em 10-10-2011 16:39, Kevin Grittner escreveu: > alexandre - aldeia digital wrote: > >> 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. > > Really? The application still performs as well or better, and it's > the load average they care about? How odd. > > If they were happy with performance before the RAM was added, why > did they add it? If they weren't happy with performance, what led > them to believe that adding more RAM would help? If there's a > performance problem, there's generally one bottleneck which is the > limit, with one set of symptoms. When you remove that bottleneck > and things get faster, you may well have a new bottleneck with > different symptoms. (These symptoms might include high load average > or CPU usage, for example.) You then figure out what is causing > *that* bottleneck, and you can make things yet faster. Calm down: if the client plans to add , for example, another database in his server in a couple of weeks, he must only upgrade when this new database come to life and add another point of doubt ??? IMHO, the reasons to add MEMORY does not matters in this case. I came to the list to see if anyone else has experienced the same problem, that not necessarily is related with Postgres. Shaun and Greg apparently had the same the same problems in CentOS and the information provided by they helped too much...