Thank you very much for the answer. Regards.
-----Mensaje original----- De: Toshihiro Kitagawa [mailto:[email protected]] Enviado el: lunes, 03 de octubre de 2011 03:23 Para: Lazaro Rubén García Martinez CC: Glyn Astill; [email protected] Asunto: Re: [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool II Hi Lazaro, On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 08:40:59 -0430 Lazaro Rubén García Martinez <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the answer, One question, the patch proposed for some memory leaks > can be applied in Pgpool-II 3.1. The patch is not applicable to pgpool-II 3.1 without editing. I've attached the same patch for pgpool-II 3.1. It is unnecessary except for raw mode to apply these patches. Regards. -- Toshihiro Kitagawa SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > > Regards. > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Toshihiro Kitagawa [mailto:[email protected]] Enviado el: > viernes, 30 de septiembre de 2011 12:18 > Para: Lazaro Rubén García Martinez > CC: Glyn Astill; [email protected] > Asunto: Re: [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool II > > Hi Lazaro, > > On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:44:41 -0430 > Lazaro Rubén García Martinez <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi all, Is there an estimated date for release Pgpool-II version 3.0.5 and > > 3.1.1?. > > pgpool-II 3.0.5 is going to be released by the end of October. > The release time of pgpool-II 3.1.1 is undecided now. > > Regards. > > -- > Toshihiro Kitagawa > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > > > > Regards. > > > > -----Mensaje original----- > > De: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] En nombre de Toshihiro > > Kitagawa Enviado el: miércoles, 28 de septiembre de 2011 10:38 > > Para: Glyn Astill > > CC: [email protected] > > Asunto: Re: [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool II > > > > Hi Glyn, > > > > Thank you for your help. > > This problem will be fixed in next minor version up(3.0.5/3.1.1). > > > > -- > > Toshihiro Kitagawa > > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > > > > On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:20:51 +0100 (BST) Glyn Astill > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Toshihiro, > > > > > > I can confirm that patch works and we no longer see the memory leak. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Glyn > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Toshihiro Kitagawa <[email protected]> > > > > To: Glyn Astill <[email protected]>; takizo > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: "[email protected]" > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2011, 10:57 > > > > Subject: Re: [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool II > > > > > > > > Hi Glyn, takizo, > > > > > > > > I created a patch to fix a massive memory leak of raw mode. > > > > The patch which was posted before by Yoshiyuki seems correct. > > > > However, I think it's better to call > > > > pool_query_context_destroy() than free_parser(). > > > > > > > > Would you try an attached patch? > > > > > > > > The patch is for V3.0_STABLE branch, but it's applicable to > > > > pgpool-II 3.0.x too. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Toshihiro Kitagawa > > > > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > > > > > > > > On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 20:14:41 +0900 Toshihiro Kitagawa > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi Glyn, takizo, > > > >> > > > >> Sorry for delay. > > > >> > > > >> I fixed some memory leaks in pgpool-II 3.1 and V3_0_STABLE. > > > >> But I guess memory leaks are remaining as you say. > > > >> > > > >> Surely, free_parser() which was commented out might be problem. > > > >> However, I think simply uncommenting leads unexpected new problem. > > > >> So we have to fix those carefully. > > > >> > > > >> I will investigate and fix memory problems which was posted to > > > >> this ML from now on. > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Toshihiro Kitagawa > > > >> SRA OSS, Inc. Japan > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 16:22:50 +0800 takizo <[email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Glyn, > > > >> > > > > >> > Surely, I will try 2.3.3 :) > Thanks a lot > > -- > Paul > > > >> Ooi > > > > On Sep 8, 2011, at 4:00 PM, Glyn Astill wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi takizo, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > We are currently using Pgpool-II 2.3.3 and it has been > > > >> really > > > > stable for us. Unless you're after a specific feature in > > > > Pgpool-II 3.x you could perhaps try it? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > So far I've had no luck with the patch posted by > > > >> Yoshiyuki, > > > > even with that patch there is still a massive memory leak in > > > > 3.0.4. It would appear that pool_proto_modules.c has lots > > > > commented out calls to free_parser(), many more than the single > > > > case that Yoshiyuki uncommented with his patch, so either there > > > > is a bit of a mess there that needs sorting out by someone who knows > > > > the overall logic, or the issue is elsewhere. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Glyn > > > >> > > > > > >> > > From: takizo <[email protected]> > > To: Glyn Astill > > > >> <[email protected]> > > Cc: > > > >> "[email protected]" > > > > <[email protected]> > > > >> > > Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2011, 1:48 > > Subject: Re: > > > >> [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool II > > > > Gyln, > > > > > > >> > Thanks. I happened to read through the thread after posted > > > >> the > > > > mail. It seems like I have to stick with Pgpool I until the developer > > > > is free. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > takizo > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Sep 7, 2011, at 10:53 PM, Glyn Astill wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> Hi takizo, > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> Yes this bug has been seen by numerous people on the > > > >> list, > > > > Yoshiyuki Asaba has posted a patch, however there has been no > > > > response from the main Pgpool II developers. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> I did ask a few times, and also asked if we'd be better > > > > testing 3.1, but alas still no response. I can only assume the > > > > devs are busy or otherwise indisposed. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> See the thread below for the patch. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg0314 > > > > 1.html > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> Glyn > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> From: takizo <[email protected]> > >> To: > > > >> [email protected] > >> Sent: Wednesday, 7 September > > > >> 2011, 15:02 > >> Subject: [Pgpool-general] Pgpool I vs Pgpool > > > >> II > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Today I have upgraded Pgpool > > > >> I to Pgpool II. And I had to > > > > roll back to Pgpool I due to memory hunger issue. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> My server is configured with > >> PostgreSQL 8.2, > >> > > > >> running on FreeBSD 8.2 > >> Intel Xeon box with 4 CPUs with > > > >> Quad Core, total of 16 cores > >> Memory with 24GB > >> > >> > > > >> * While running on Pgpool I > >> I do no have memory hunger > > > >> issue. On postgresql.conf, I have > > > > max_connections=200 and shared_buffers=2GB. > > > >> > >> Most of the time, I have 8GB memory in used and 10GB Free > > > >> and > > > > some in cached. Everything run just fine and perfectly good. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> * I tried upgraded to Pgpool II > >> Same config on > > > >> postgresql.conf, when I started PgPool II > > > > (3.0.4), my active memory started increasing and it didn't drop at all. > > > >> > >> I left the server running and after about 20 minutes, > > > >> 20GB > > > > memory is in used, ended up it used swap memory because running out of > > > > memory. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> I run a reload/restart on pgpool, I gained back 14GB of > > > >> free > > > > memory, and slowly it started to taken up those freed memory in > > > > active memory after about 15-20 minutes. > > > >> > >> I tried to bring down max_connections and shared_buffers > > > > value, and the memory doesn't stop taking up. It still slowly > > > > gaining all the memory it wants. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> Has anyone having that problem as well? I hope I can find > > > > some answer here :) > > > >> > >> Wanted to try out pgpool II performance but this problem > > > >> is > > > > the stopper for now. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> Hope to get feedback from gurus in the house. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> Thanks! > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> -- > > > >> > >> takizo > > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> > >> Pgpool-general mailing list > >> > > > >> [email protected] > >> > > > >> http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> Pgpool-general mailing list > > > >> [email protected] > > > >> http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pgpool-general mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general > _______________________________________________ Pgpool-general mailing list [email protected] http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general
