
this might be something new that I didn't see go through, or, at least,
get implemented...but, under a Linux system, fresh install this morning,
of v6.5:

19130  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -o -F -o /usr/local/pgsql/er
19416  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    
19418  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    
19425  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    
21163  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    
21288  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    
21290  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    
21303  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    
21445  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle    

yet nobody is using that system yet except me testing a couple of times...


Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Thu, 17 Jun 1999 14:20:24 -0300 (ADT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
'idle' processes in v6.5?
> ... under a Linux system ...
              ^^^^^

Ah, finally seen the light...
You didn't expect _that_ to go unnoticed, did you?

> 19130  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -o -F -o /usr/local/pgsql/er
> 19416  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> 19418  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> 19425  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> 21163  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> 21288  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> 21290  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> 21303  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> 21445  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> yet nobody is using that system yet except me testing a couple of times...

Yes, "nobody" *is* using the system. You sure you don't have a web
server or something? Anything else running as "nobody"?

                     - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart				lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California

Fri, 18 Jun 1999 01:39:18 +0000
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] 'idle' processes in v6.5?
On Fri, 18 Jun 1999, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> > ... under a Linux system ...
>               ^^^^^
> 
> Ah, finally seen the light...
> You didn't expect _that_ to go unnoticed, did you?

I'm getting paid *well* to put up with it :)

> > 19130  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster -o -F -o /usr/local/pgsql/er
> > 19416  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > 19418  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > 19425  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > 21163  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > 21288  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > 21290  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > 21303  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > 21445  p2 S    0:00 /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postgres 127.0.0.1 nobody imp idle
> > yet nobody is using that system yet except me testing a couple of times...
> 
> Yes, "nobody" *is* using the system. You sure you don't have a web
> server or something? Anything else running as "nobody"?

Ya, but no connections through it yet...does PHP auto-open connections to
the backend as a sort of cache/pool?

Marc G. Fournier                   ICQ#7615664               IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org 
primary: scrappy@hub.org           secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org 


Thu, 17 Jun 1999 22:59:52 -0300 (ADT)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] 'idle' processes in v6.5?
> > > ... under a Linux system ...
> >               ^^^^^
> > Ah, finally seen the light...
> > You didn't expect _that_ to go unnoticed, did you?
> I'm getting paid *well* to put up with it :)

Well, that story will work for a while...

> > Yes, "nobody" *is* using the system. You sure you don't have a web
> > server or something? Anything else running as "nobody"?
> Ya, but no connections through it yet...does PHP auto-open connections to
> the backend as a sort of cache/pool?

afaik, yes. Haven't run it myself though. I imagine that there are
tunable parameters for that sort of thing.

                  - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart				lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California

Fri, 18 Jun 1999 02:22:13 +0000
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] 'idle' processes in v6.5?
On Fri, Jun 18, 1999 at 02:22:13AM +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > > > ... under a Linux system ...
> > >               ^^^^^
> > > Ah, finally seen the light...
> > > You didn't expect _that_ to go unnoticed, did you?
> > I'm getting paid *well* to put up with it :)
> 
> Well, that story will work for a while...
> 
> > > Yes, "nobody" *is* using the system. You sure you don't have a web
> > > server or something? Anything else running as "nobody"?
> > Ya, but no connections through it yet...does PHP auto-open connections to
> > the backend as a sort of cache/pool?
> 
> afaik, yes. Haven't run it myself though. I imagine that there are
> tunable parameters for that sort of thing.

No, no auto-open connections. From the database name (imp), I
would guess that you are running the IMAP web frontend named IMP
which is using persistent connections to the database - these
aren't closed automatically, so they hang around idle.

-- 

          Regards,

                            Sascha Schumann
                                 Consultant

Fri, 18 Jun 1999 12:56:08 +0200
Sascha Schumann <sascha@schumann.2ns.de>
Re: [HACKERS] 'idle' processes in v6.5?