this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
6 points (100.0% liked)
PostgreSQL
656 readers
1 users here now
The world's most advanced open source relational database
Project
- About (history)
- Docs
- Donate to PostgreSQL
- Wiki
- Planet PostgreSQL
- IRC
- Mailing lists:
- pgsql-announce
- pgsql-hackers (developers)
- pgsql-general
- pgsql-jobs
- User Groups
Events
- SEAPUG Summer BBQ, 6 July in Seattle
- SFBA PostgreSQL Meetup, 12 July
- Chicago PostgreSQL Meetup, 19 July
- PGDay UK 2023, 12 September in London
- PGConf 2023, 3-5 October in New York City
- PGDay Israel 2023, 19 October
- PGConf.EU 2023, 12-15 December in Prague
Podcasts
Related Fediverse communities
- c/SQL on programming.dev
- #sql on Mastodon
- #postgresql on Mastodon
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
VACUUM
ed the DB. I just assumed it does it automatically at regular intervals. VACUUMing manually didn't seem to make any difference and gave me the following error after a few minutes of running on various tables:ERROR: could not resize shared memory segment "/PostgreSQL.1987530338" to 67128672 bytes: No space left on device
I'm not 100% sure where it out of space, but I'm assuming one of the configured buffers since there was still plenty of space left on disk and RAM. I didn't notice any difference in iowait while it was running or after.insert
s, but I see a roughly equal number ofselect
s. I did increaseshared_buffers
andeffective_cache_size
with no effect.I did install Prometheus with PG exporter and Grafana. I'm not a DB expert and certainly not a PostgreSQL expert, but I don't see anything that would indicate an issue. Anything specific you can suggest that I should focus on?
Thanks for all the suggestions!
That means too many chunky parallel maintenance workers are using the memory at the same time (
max_parallel_maintenance_workers
andmaintenance_work_mem
.)VACCUM
ing is a very important part of how PG works; can you try settingmax_parallel_maintenance_workers
to 1 or even 0 (disable parallel altogether) and retry the experiment?That probably rules out the theory of thrashed indices.
Since those stats are cumulative, it's hard to tell anything w/o knowing when was the
SELECT
run. It'd be very helpful if you could run those queries a few times w/ 1min interval and share the output.I'd start w/ the 3 tables I mentioned in the previous point and try to find anomalies esp under different workloads. The rest, I'm afraid, is going to be a bit of an investigation and detective work.
If you like, you can give me access to the Grafana dashboard so I can take a look and we can take it from there. It's going to be totally free of charge of course as I am quite interested in your problem: it's both a challenge for me and helping a fellow Lemmy user. The only thing I ask is that we report back the results and solution here so that others can benefit from the work.
No problem. PM me an IP (v4 or v6) or an email address (disposable is fine) and I'll reply with a link to access Grafana with above in allow list.