[Spacewalk-list] [Spacewalk-devel] I think I found the root cause of the PostgreSQL Idle in transaction connection build up.

[Jonathan Scott]

Update:

The system still seems to be managing the "idle in transaction" processes
much better than before. While the number fluctuates (its in the 30s
today), it doesn't appear to be a detriment to the application as it was
once before.

- Jonathan

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Jonathan Scott <lists at xistenz.org> wrote:

> Yea; after my nightly errata check, my "idle in transaction" processes
> climbed up to 50 and has hung there all morning. The only real noticeable
> change is that the app was actually functional this morning after the
> errata load vs. hung with maxed out apache processes. I'll keep running
> under this configuration for the remainder of the week.
>
> - Jonathan
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Paul Robert Marino <prmarino1 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Well after letting it run for 24 hours Ive found it doesn't completely
>> eliminate them but it has reduced them significantly.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Wojtak, Greg (Superfly)
>> <GregWojtak at quickenloans.com> wrote:
>> > Just sayin', I haven't seen these in the two days since I upgraded to
>> spacewalk 1.8…
>> >
>> > If they do appear, I wouldn't mind testing either.  I've got a few
>> hundred servers on our spacewalk instance, along with a proxy,  to help
>> stress it with.
>> >
>> > Greg Wojtak
>> > Sr. Unix Systems Engineer
>> > Office: (313) 373-4306
>> > Cell: (734) 718-8472
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Jonathan Scott <lists at xistenz.org<mailto:lists at xistenz.org>>
>> > Reply-To: "lists at xistenz.org<mailto:lists at xistenz.org>" <
>> lists at xistenz.org<mailto:lists at xistenz.org>>, "spacewalk-list at redhat.com
>> <mailto:spacewalk-list at redhat.com>" <spacewalk-list at redhat.com<mailto:
>> spacewalk-list at redhat.com>>
>> > Date: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 1:39 PM
>> > To: "spacewalk-list at redhat.com<mailto:spacewalk-list at redhat.com>" <
>> spacewalk-list at redhat.com<mailto:spacewalk-list at redhat.com>>
>> > Cc: Tom Lane <tgl at redhat.com<mailto:tgl at redhat.com>>, "
>> spacewalk-devel at redhat.com<mailto:spacewalk-devel at redhat.com>" <
>> spacewalk-devel at redhat.com<mailto:spacewalk-devel at redhat.com>>
>> > Subject: Re: [Spacewalk-list] [Spacewalk-devel] I think I found the
>> root cause of the PostgreSQL Idle in transaction connection build up.
>> >
>> > Paul, you stud! I'm one of the ones reporting this same issue, and I
>> will happily volunteer my 60-instance Spacewalk 1.7 install for testing.
>> I'll implement your fix and report back on my findings.
>> >
>> > - Jonathan
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Paul Robert Marino <
>> prmarino1 at gmail.com<mailto:prmarino1 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Well you are right there is nothing in the change log that idicates
>> that this issue existed or how its fixed.
>> > But as I said it seems to fix it there is probably a side effect fix
>> that was not planed but seems to work.
>> > The results are rediculously obvious initialy now honestly I think it
>> needs a few days of testing to prove it, and I would like for others to
>> confirm it but from my initial test it on one of my development instances
>> it looks good. I would like other people to test it because I'm not using
>> monitoring on that instance and I only have a few systems attached to it
>> but the difference is so obvious there is deffinitly something there.
>> > By the way I've seen the change log betwean 701to 702 but I haven't
>> seen the change log betwean 702 and 703 and I looked its not on their site
>> or in the source package as far as I could initialy tell.
>> >
>> > While I admit I can't point to a reason in the change log why, it at
>> least initialy seems to work. I think if any thing it may be a compound
>> correction of multiple bugs that may of fixed a larger harder to pinpoint
>>  issue.
>> >
>> > On Nov 6, 2012 12:01 AM, "Tom Lane" <tgl at redhat.com<mailto:
>> tgl at redhat.com>> wrote:
>> > Paul Robert Marino <prmarino1 at gmail.com<mailto:prmarino1 at gmail.com>>
>> writes:
>> >> Ive been doing some testing and I am fairly positive I found out why
>> >> the number of connections in PostgreSQL increases and its not a
>> >> spacewalk bug at all.
>> >> It looks like its a JDBC bug [ and is fixed in 8.4-703 ]
>> >
>> > This is really interesting, but I looked through the upstream commit
>> > logs, and I can't see any patches between 8.4-701 and 8.4-703 that look
>> > like they'd cure a "connection leak" such as you're describing.  There
>> > are a couple of fixes for possible loss-of-protocol-sync issues, but it
>> > doesn't seem like that would result in silent leakage; the symptoms
>> > would be pretty obvious.
>> >
>> > Have you poked into the client-side state to see what that end thinks
>> > it's doing with the idle connections?
>> >
>> >                         regards, tom lane
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Spacewalk-list mailing list
>> > Spacewalk-list at redhat.com<mailto:Spacewalk-list at redhat.com>
>> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Spacewalk-list mailing list
>> > Spacewalk-list at redhat.com
>> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Spacewalk-list mailing list
>> Spacewalk-list at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-list
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/spacewalk-list/attachments/20121109/6dc63cad/attachment.htm>