On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Alexander V Openkin <[email protected]> wrote: > 09.06.2010 11:54, Scott Marlowe пишет: >> >> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 1:37 AM, Alexander V Openkin<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Tnx for the quick answer, >>> but if you run all slon process (for your replication cluster) >>> you must have standalone server with 32G ? >>> I think this is unnatural ) >>> >> >> No, definitely not. VIRT is everything the process has ever touched, >> including shared memory and all libs whether or not they've actually >> been loaded or not. It's not uncommon to have literally a hundred >> processes with 8G+VIRT on my 32Gig db servers, because most of that 8G >> is shred buffers. It's not using that much memory individually, it's >> using shared_memory, and each process reports that it has access to >> and has touched that 8G. >> >> > > small experement, the second instance for ather Db was added... > > [r...@vpsxxxx /]# /etc/init.d/slon stop > Stopping slon service: [ DONE ] > Stopping slon service: [ DONE ] > [r...@vpsxxxx /]# ps axuf |grep slon > root 28419 0.0 0.0 6044 580 pts/0 S+ Jun08 0:00 \_ grep slon > [r...@vps6147 /]# free > total used free shared buffers cached > Mem: 10485760 99192 10386568 0 0 0 > -/+ buffers/cache: 99192 10386568 > Swap: 0 0 0 > [r...@vpsxxx /]# /etc/init.d/slon start > Starting slon service: [ DONE ] > [r...@vpsxxx /]# ps axuf |grep slon > root 29737 0.0 0.0 6040 584 pts/0 S+ Jun08 0:00 \_ grep slon > postgres 28555 0.0 0.0 40636 1832 pts/0 S Jun08 0:00 /usr/bin/slon > postgres 28556 0.0 0.0 4042880 1508 pts/0 Sl Jun08 0:00 \_ /usr/bin/slon > postgres 28592 0.0 0.0 40636 1836 pts/0 S Jun08 0:00 /usr/bin/slon > postgres 28594 0.0 0.0 4042880 1512 pts/0 Sl Jun08 0:00 \_ /usr/bin/slon > [r...@vpsxxxx /]# free > total used free shared buffers cached > Mem: 10485760 8119136 2366624 0 0 0 > -/+ buffers/cache: 8119136 2366624 > Swap: 0 0 0 > [r...@vpsxxxx /]# > > The different between "no slon process" and "2 pair slon process" ~8G, that > we have a problem, > because it`s not a shared segment.....
Oh whoa, I thought you were talking about the postgres backend that slony connects to using up that much memory. I wonder if there's some accounting difference in how your vps works versus running right on the server. > Besides OpenVZ divide shared memory and resident memory > > [r...@vps6147 /]# cat /proc/user_beancounters |grep -E > 'privvmpages|shmpages' > privvmpages 2029830 2033439 2621440 2621440 5 > shmpages 17632 17632 412000 412000 0 > [r...@vps6147 /]# > > first column - the current value in 4k pages, it`s indicates very small > shared segment and huge resident segment, Yeah, that's different from what I was thinking was going on. > Do you have a expirience using slony1 on x86_64 servers ? Quite a bit actually. > We using slony1 replication about 3 year on i686 architecture and we hav`t Is that a "have" or "haven't" ? > similar problem.... > > PS we using the same OpenVZ template for application servers, and > probability error in template or in the current VPS is minimum. I've never run dbs inside vms before (seems counter productive to me) _______________________________________________ Slony1-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
