Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Tom Lane
Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 17:29 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> Sounds to me like you just need to up the total amount of open files >> allowed by the operating system. > It looks more like the opposite, here's the docs for > max_files_per_process: I think J

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Ralph Mason wrote: > I have several databases. They are each about 35gb in size and have about > 10.5K relations (count from pg_stat_all_tables) in them. Pg_class is about > 26k rows and the data directory contains about 70k files. These are busy > machines, they run about 50 xactions per secon

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Scott Mohekey
Just adding a bit of relevant information: We have the kernel file-max setting set to 297834 (256 per 4mb of ram). /proc/sys/fs/file-nr tells us that we have roughly 13000 allocated handles of which zero are always free. On 10/05/07, Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 2007-05-09

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Ralph Mason
>To me, that means that his machine is allowing the new FD to be created, >but then can't really support that many so it gives an error. files-max is 297834 ulimit is 100 (doesn't make sense but there you go) What I don’t really understand is with max_files_per_process at 800 we don't get th

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Jeff Davis
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 17:29 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > 2007-05-09 03:07:50.083 GMT 1146975740: LOCATION: BasicOpenFile, > > fd.c:471 > > > > 2007-05-09 03:07:50.091 GMT 0: LOG: 0: duration: 12.362 ms > > > > 2007-05-09 03:07:50.091 GMT 0: LOCATION: exec_simple_query,

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Joshua D. Drake
Hello, You likely need to increase your file-max parameters using sysctl.conf. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Ralph Mason
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of CAJ CAJ Sent: 10 May 2007 12:26 To: Ralph Mason Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes I have several databases. They are each about 35gb in size and have about 10.5K relations (count

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Joshua D. Drake
2007-05-09 03:07:50.083 GMT 1146975740: LOCATION: BasicOpenFile, fd.c:471 2007-05-09 03:07:50.091 GMT 0: LOG: 0: duration: 12.362 ms 2007-05-09 03:07:50.091 GMT 0: LOCATION: exec_simple_query, postgres.c:1090 So we decreased the max_files_per_process to

Re: [PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread CAJ CAJ
I have several databases. They are each about 35gb in size and have about 10.5K relations (count from pg_stat_all_tables) in them. Pg_class is about 26k rows and the data directory contains about 70k files. These are busy machines, they run about 50 xactions per second, ( aproxx insert / update

[PERFORM] Performance Woes

2007-05-09 Thread Ralph Mason
Hi, I have several databases. They are each about 35gb in size and have about 10.5K relations (count from pg_stat_all_tables) in them. Pg_class is about 26k rows and the data directory contains about 70k files. These are busy machines, they run about 50 xactions per second, ( aproxx insert /