Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C94D2E0093 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:09:18 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 79448-04 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:09:13 -0400 (AST) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.179]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D4D42E0091 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:09:13 -0400 (AST) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m38so3024590waf.5 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:09:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=OpXAy977hYMlJXGzTsIHuy8H/BNpYOHGgOjwqMLY2l4=; b=xeUx8kXg6p4S466YCCzCzAwCfe1ZbWLmElTG5L7493XtbAyuK9YfhTC833uEGQT36wCfuPit6Juc7P9ofMw1aFWUwDd3pe7hf5ENMwIHSMzeG+PGo1/QDBzB3enOsg8dVmo9YvYOP/xDD9HmX+pVJ6b+AVvDv3TxPLLwN2xrY8g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=U9V/egn/EvXsYkXgAWeP5WeVlaAtQFxc7O97+tSzalVwpTXZhLLPtBS2MGapEwGHQV6UQDZ2M7ZswKg7LMqCRiXJwVKlkndR0bW4uhpujj4vXADrj4YkrgkSRm52+VV/NE+Ybe3zCjqE4OWL6846fIS4Jd+edpuG3t6l63uwojo= Received: by 10.115.47.1 with SMTP id z1mr3433873waj.117.1201500552460; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:09:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.201.12 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:09:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8a547c840801272209n4b6cfa0ch1ecdc5018b940c9f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:09:12 -0800 From: "Tory M Blue" To: "Greg Smith" Subject: Re: Postgres 8.2 memory weirdness Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <8a547c840801231023q55796128nb2e88b8c8cfe86e@mail.gmail.com> <8a547c840801240946n37c7fad6ycf62187f82b2027c@mail.gmail.com> <8a547c840801250936w59aad548w268f24a5fcc89ccf@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200801/257 X-Sequence-Number: 28496 On Jan 27, 2008 4:08 PM, Greg Smith wrote: > > More segments means more disk space taken up with them and a longer crash > recovery. Those are the downsides; if you can live with those there's no > reason to run at <100 if that works for you. Fine-tuning here isn't > really that helpful. > > I'm a little confused by your report through because you should still be > seeing regular checkpoint warnings if you set checkpoint_warning = 3600s , > they should just be spaced further apart. I'm not seeing any warnings at all. [idb01 ~]$ sudo cat /data/logs/pgsql-27.log | grep -i check [idb01 ~]$ sudo cat /data/logs/pgsql-26.log | grep -i check [idb01 ~]$ sudo cat /data/logs/pgsql-25.log | grep -i check [idb01 ~]$ sudo cat /data/logs/pgsql-24.log | grep -i check 2008-01-24 03:54:39 PST LOG: checkpoints are occurring too frequently (89 seconds apart) 2008-01-24 03:54:39 PST HINT: Consider increasing the configuration parameter "checkpoint_segments". 2008-01-24 07:26:25 PST LOG: checkpoints are occurring too frequently (106 seconds apart) 2008-01-24 07:26:25 PST HINT: Consider increasing the configuration parameter "checkpoint_segments". 2008-01-24 11:34:18 PST LOG: checkpoints are occurring too frequently (173 seconds apart) 2008-01-24 11:34:18 PST HINT: Consider increasing the configuration parameter "checkpoint_segments". Segment config still: # - Checkpoints - checkpoint_segments = 100 # bumped from 50 checkpoint_timeout = 300 # range 30s-1h #checkpoint_warning = 30s # 0 is off checkpoint_warning = 3600s # 0 is off No warnings in my logs, I see some LOG information but it pertains to slon and not postgres directly. Ideas?! Thanks again Tory