(resolution?) Re: [HACKERS] memory problem again

From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel(at)digsys(dot)bg>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: (resolution?) Re: [HACKERS] memory problem again
Date: 1999-12-07 08:25:56
Message-ID: 199912070825.KAA26222@dcave.digsys.bg
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I found out how to resolve this problem, yet it does not explain why it
happens anyway!

I had postmaster started with this script:

unlimit
postmaster -D/usr/local/pgsql/data -B 256 -i -o "-e -S 8192" >>
/usr/local/pgsql/errlog 2>&1 &

Removing all the parameters to postmaster

postmaster -D/usr/local/pgsql/data -i -o "-e" >> /usr/local/pgsql/errlog 2>&1 &

made it work....

Perhaps some memory management problem? I guess the -S option is the culprit
here, but this machine has 256 MB RAM and actually never swaps (yet).

Hope this helps somehow.

Daniel

>>>Tom Lane said:
> Daniel Kalchev <daniel(at)digsys(dot)bg> writes:
> > I have this problem with PostgreSQL 6.5.2:
>
> > logs=> select distinct confid
> > logs-> from timelog199910
> > logs-> where
> > logs-> confid IS NOT NULL;
> > pqReadData() -- backend closed the channel unexpectedly.
>
> > The logged message in stderr (of postmaster) is
> > FATAL 1: Memory exhausted in AllocSetAlloc()
>
> Odd. I can't replicate this here. (I'm using 6.5.3, but I doubt that
> matters.) There must be some factor involved that you haven't told us.
> You don't have any triggers or rules on the table, do you?
>
> Has anyone else seen anything like this?
>
> regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Mount 1999-12-07 08:46:16 RE: [HACKERS] When is 7.0 going Beta?
Previous Message Daniel Kalchev 1999-12-07 08:14:07 Re: [HACKERS] memory problem again