10.06.2010 10:07, Scott Marlowe пишет:
> 2010/6/9 Alexander V Openkin<[email protected]>:
>
>> 09.06.2010 18:27, Scott Marlowe пишет:
>>
>>> Oh whoa, I thought you were talking about the postgres backend that
>>> slony connects to using up that much memory.
>>>
>>>
>> no, we tolking about slon processes, not about postgres backend.
>>
>>
>>> I wonder if there's some accounting difference in how your vps works
>>> versus running right on the server.
>>>
>>>
>> I have ~five replication cluster on slony1-1.2.14 and postgresql-8.3.9 on
>> i686 architecture and
>> we never see such problem...
>> I think that no differents between running slony cluster on hardware server
>> or VPS
>>
> Is this the same OS as on hardware? The accounting seems all kinds of
> wrong to me. I just can't see slony asking for and getting 4G or 8G
> of ram.
>
>
The same linux kernel,
on OpenVZ hardware server, we can run different OS (different linux
distributions),
but the kernel will be same.
i run ps auxf on hardware server
[r...@vz19 ~]# ps auxf |grep slon |grep cms
postgres 6973 0.0 0.0 40636 1836 ? S 09:58 0:00 \_
/usr/bin/slon -f /etc/slony1.d/blabla
postgres 6974 0.0 0.0 4108420 1544 ? Sl 09:58 0:00 | \_
/usr/bin/slon -f /etc/slony1.d/blabla
postgres 7016 0.0 0.0 40640 1836 ? S 09:58 0:00 \_
/usr/bin/slon -f /etc/slony1.d/blabla2
postgres 7017 0.0 0.0 4108424 1544 ? Sl 09:58 0:00 \_
/usr/bin/slon -f /etc/slony1.d/blabla2
[r...@vz19 ~]#
the fifth colunm is a VSZ (in kb) it show us two 4G segments...
>>>> 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" ?
>>>
>> i mean haven't.
>> i have a 3 year expirience with slon replication and postgresql8.{0,1,2,3}
>> on i686 architecture and i have never seen it before
>>
> I have mostly experience on x86_64 / AMD64 hardware. A little in the
> past on 32 bit pentium, but that was slony 1.0 days.
>
>
>> yesterday i read a news on slony.info "Slony-I 2.0.3 is not usable in its
>> current state."
>>
> Correct. Like 2.0.4 will be close. I tried it last year and it blew
> up twice. Luckily switching out 1.2.latest for 2.0.x is pretty easily
> done.
>
>
>>>> 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)
>>>
>> PS sorry for my awful english, i am russian )
>>
> Your English is much better than my Russian, no need to apologize.
>
> Have you tried switching it out for slony 1.2.latest? I'm thinking
> it won't help this memory usage issue, but if you're in production you
> should really be on 1.2.latest not 2.0.x.
>
>
I'll try 1.2.latest, and show result's
_______________________________________________
Slony1-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slony.info/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
