Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A10726500BA for ; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 15:14:47 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 67469-06 for ; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 15:14:45 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com (yx-out-2324.google.com [74.125.44.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE9736500A4 for ; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 15:14:44 -0400 (AST) Received: by yx-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 8so1534024yxb.73 for ; Wed, 03 Dec 2008 11:14:44 -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=SqJZ1arx4oLDIa9ky/m8K5mOe76vWAX+pH4j8XaFVts=; b=msfFOKS2VrWK4297Ejb2+iVtU88ouYKhKB/zU2YwMiSvck0znn5RkDSPgGdJr0aPQ3 I3v6DMLqXBPoXTZRB0B7GkQXGmQQhrl6qhj3RlQIqHSbia+beWOXTK50Qj83J+VhSJ26 /Mi1OrsfLG1LNgBdNgGKXMWHzgwZZkNgdUkPU= 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=xtIj3mzLAnlUQq/ezMV7HU+VLFWxjkpLpXj6zT7tWvYyFyquoUm5tWXcb/dQaMwYTp 4ZiKPTdN1NaDZjWcuwHmd84yYw681jXtX9zEIVmuDp5Okj69a3wsgnXfNyi+n5kSqZo6 kwLcU5iTieVNoteKjIXX/qv7QkHziKhOivqtA= Received: by 10.114.148.2 with SMTP id v2mr8417483wad.26.1228331683463; Wed, 03 Dec 2008 11:14:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.133.4 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Dec 2008 11:14:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 12:14:43 -0700 From: "Scott Marlowe" To: "Matthew Wakeling" Subject: Re: Postgres using more memory than it should Cc: tv@fuzzy.cz, 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: <61517.89.102.139.23.1228321512.squirrel@sq.gransy.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200812/27 X-Sequence-Number: 32063 On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Matthew Wakeling wrote: > On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Scott Marlowe wrote: >> Also, you should REALLY update to 8.3.5 as there are some nasty bugs >> fixed from 8.3.0 you don't want to run into. Who knows, you might be >> being bitten by one right now. Unlike other bits of software floating >> around, pgsql updates are bug fix / security fix only, with no major >> code changes allowed, since those go into the next release which is >> usually ~1 year later anyway. > > It's possible, although I didn't see any relevant memory leaks in the > release notes. This is one of the only machines we have that has not been > upgraded, and it is on our schedule. Because it is running a slightly old > version of RedHat Fedora, upgrading involves more horribleness than our > sysadmin is willing to do on the fly with the server up. That makes absolutely no sense. If it's an in house built rpm, you just create a new one with the same .spec file, if it was built from source it's a simple ./configure --youroptionshere ;make;make install. You need a new sysadmin.