Thanks for the reply, but I think i sorted this out, that was why i spoke of “RES”. As far as I understand memory stats
shownby top or glances there are two columns, one for “virtual memory” (top->Size, glances->VIRT) and one for
residentialmemory (RES in both cases). And my understanding is that virtual shows the memory including shared memory
chunks,RES shows the actually used memory by this process alone.
I absolutely could be wrong in my interpretation - since I read at many places that theses distinctions are difficult.
Bottom line is: My server swapes and pagedeamon is one of the busiest processes :) So RAM is used in vast amounts.
> On 22. Nov 2018, at 17:26, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Sebastian Gabbert <pg@huehnerhose.de> writes:
>> Postgres is running on a dedicated FreeBSD 11.2 server with 32GB of RAM, there is a second server in hot standby /
walreplication. My “worker” processes, mainly php processes, connect through pgbouncer (session mode).
>
>> What I observed is that there are, at any time, around 10-15 postgres backend processes on my main db server
consumingaround 4GB of memory (RES in glances) each. These processes keep this footprint until pgbouncer closes the
connection.
>
> That is, most likely, almost entirely shared space (shared buffers and so
> on). Sorting out how much is shared and how much is actually per-process
> memory can be tricky, because most Unix process monitoring tools aren't
> very good about showing the difference. I don't use FreeBSD enough to be
> sure how to tell the difference with its tools --- but you can't get
> anywhere with diagnosing PG's true memory consumption until you've got a
> handle on that.
>
> It would be interesting to know what you've got shared_buffers set to
> on this server, though.
>
> regards, tom lane
>