Hello Bharath,

Thanks for your reply.
I am using MariaDB on a standalone server.

The figures I used in the original email are hypothetical. I basically want
to validate if handling these standing instructions can be a long term
solution for this particular job.

Regards.
Wilfred

On Wed, 10 Sept 2025, 16:45 Bharath Gowda, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Wilfred,
>
> I understand that you do not want to change the server specs but which
> Database are you using and is that a standalone server?
>
> Few options we could consider first
> 1. Having a standalone server for DB
> 2. Check and tweek the DB settings and configurations
> 3. Small changes to jobs configs
>      - Disable all unnecessary jobs as per your functionality usage
>      - Check and Adjust the cron timing of each active job to make sure
> one job runs at a time
>
> Tweaking the jobs to process in batches could also work but eventually
> this problem will occur for other jobs or other actions when the volume is
> again increased in future.
> So, I would suggest finding a permanent fix for the issue.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Bharath
> Lead Implementation Analyst | Mifos Initiative
> PMC Member | Apache Fineract
> Mobile: +91.7019635592
> http://mifos.org  <http://facebook.com/mifos>
> <http://www.twitter.com/mifos>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 6:46 PM Kigred Developer <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Devs,
>>
>> You find that when groups are starting financial operations with small
>> number of transactions (both loans and savings) and the minimum machine
>> specs will work fine for sometime. This changes with time as the number of
>> transactions grows and overnight jobs hit out-of-memory issues.
>>
>> Is it a good idea to tweak a job such that it approaches the task
>> batch-wise? For example you find the an 8GB machine will process 1000
>> standing instructions without a problem but run into memory exceptions when
>> the number of instructions changes to 1200. So it a good idea to tweak the
>> job such it handles the 1000 to 1200 instructions in batches of say 250
>> instructions, then another 250 etc? With the same machine job will handle
>> task without running into memory issues.
>>
>> Is this the way it should work? What is the other way (without changing
>> server specs)?
>>
>> Regards.
>> Wilfred
>>
>

Reply via email to