On Sat, 25 Apr 2015, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > However, sometimes postgres processes got killed by 'out of swap space'.
> > I suppose the source of problem could be that VSZ size of postgres
> > processes
> > (8-9 G) is bigger than swap congigured (4G).
> >
> > Is there any way to prevent
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 01:31:14PM +0300, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Hi there colleagues,
>
> I have stable/10 on a rather big machine (2*8*2 e5 Xeon, 64G RAM, SAS+SSD ZFS
> raid10+ZIL+L2ARC) acting as a PostgreSQL server.
64G RAM is not big by modern standards, normally populated desktop can
ta
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 01:31:14PM +0300, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote:
> Hi there colleagues,
>
> I have stable/10 on a rather big machine (2*8*2 e5 Xeon, 64G RAM, SAS+SSD ZFS
> raid10+ZIL+L2ARC) acting as a PostgreSQL server.
>
> To use such a big resource pool that is mostly idle, I'd deployed po
Hi there colleagues,
I have stable/10 on a rather big machine (2*8*2 e5 Xeon, 64G RAM, SAS+SSD ZFS
raid10+ZIL+L2ARC) acting as a PostgreSQL server.
To use such a big resource pool that is mostly idle, I'd deployed poudriere
there (using tmpfs) too.
Most times this combination works like a cha
