(2013/08/06 19:33), Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-08-06 19:19:41 +0900, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
(2013/08/05 21:23), Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
... Also, there are global
limits to the amount of filehandles that can simultaneously opened on a
system.
Yeah. Raising max_files_per_pro
On 2013-08-06 19:19:41 +0900, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
> (2013/08/05 21:23), Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> >> ... Also, there are global
> >> limits to the amount of filehandles that can simultaneously opened on a
> >> system.
> >
> > Yeah. Raising max_files_per_process puts you at s
(2013/08/05 21:23), Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
>> ... Also, there are global
>> limits to the amount of filehandles that can simultaneously opened on a
>> system.
>
> Yeah. Raising max_files_per_process puts you at serious risk that
> everything else on the box will start falling ov
(2013/08/05 19:28), Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-08-05 18:40:10 +0900, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
(2013/08/05 17:14), Amit Langote wrote:
So, within the limits of max_files_per_process, the routines of file.c
should not become a bottleneck?
It may not become bottleneck.
1 FD consumes 160 byte in 6
Andres Freund writes:
> ... Also, there are global
> limits to the amount of filehandles that can simultaneously opened on a
> system.
Yeah. Raising max_files_per_process puts you at serious risk that
everything else on the box will start falling over for lack of available
FD slots. (PG itself
On 2013-08-05 18:40:10 +0900, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
> (2013/08/05 17:14), Amit Langote wrote:
> >So, within the limits of max_files_per_process, the routines of file.c
> >should not become a bottleneck?
> It may not become bottleneck.
> 1 FD consumes 160 byte in 64bit system. See linux manual at "
(2013/08/05 17:14), Amit Langote wrote:
So, within the limits of max_files_per_process, the routines of file.c
should not become a bottleneck?
It may not become bottleneck.
1 FD consumes 160 byte in 64bit system. See linux manual at "epoll".
Regards,
--
Mitsumasa KONDO
NTT Open Source Software
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:01 PM, KONDO Mitsumasa
wrote:
> Hi Amit,
>
>
> (2013/08/05 15:23), Amit Langote wrote:
>>
>> May the routines in fd.c become bottleneck with a large number of
>> concurrent connections to above database, say something like "pgbench
>> -j 8 -c 128"? Is there any other place
Hi Amit,
(2013/08/05 15:23), Amit Langote wrote:
May the routines in fd.c become bottleneck with a large number of
concurrent connections to above database, say something like "pgbench
-j 8 -c 128"? Is there any other place I should be paying attention
to?
What kind of file system did you use?
