Re: [GENERAL] in defensive of zone_reclaim_mode on linux

2015-09-06 Thread Ben Chobot
> On Sep 6, 2015, at 4:07 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > To me that sounds like the negative impact of transparent hugepages > being mitigated to some degree by zone reclaim mode (which'll avoid some > cross-node transfers). FWIW: $ cat /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled always madvise

Re: [GENERAL] in defensive of zone_reclaim_mode on linux

2015-09-06 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2015-09-04 15:37:47 -0700, Ben Chobot wrote: >> Our situation might not apply to you. But if it does, give zone_reclaim_mode >> a chance. It's not (always) as bad as others have made it out to be. > To me that sounds like the negative impact of transparent hugepages >

Re: [GENERAL] in defensive of zone_reclaim_mode on linux

2015-09-06 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2015-09-04 15:37:47 -0700, Ben Chobot wrote: > So our load would hover under 10 most of the time, then spike to over 100 for > a minute or two. Connections would get refused, the system would freeze up... > and then everything would go back to normal. The solution? Turning on > zone_recl

[GENERAL] in defensive of zone_reclaim_mode on linux

2015-09-04 Thread Ben Chobot
Over the last several months, I've seen a lot of grumbling about how zone_reclaim_mode eats babies, kicks puppies, and basically how you should just turn it off and live happily ever after. I thought I should add a counterexample, because that advice has not proven very good for us. Some facts