Re: Out of Memory - 8.2.4

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Amiel <becauseimjeff(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Out of Memory - 8.2.4
Date: 2007-08-30 16:04:10
Message-ID: 20070830160410.GQ5872@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> >> VACUUM getting "Out of memory" may not sound like a big problem, but
> >> the scary thing is - the last VACUUM's memory request may succeed and
> >> that means following queries start failing and that is big problem.
>
> > Maybe what we should do is spill the TID list to disk instead. TODO for
> > 8.4?
>
> I'm inclined to think that that'd be counterproductive. Searching the
> TID list has to be *fast*, else the index cleanup scans will take
> forever. It's probably better to have a smaller list and do two index
> passes than to try to do it in one pass using a list that doesn't fit in
> memory --- in the former case you're at least doing a seqscan of the
> index, rather than randomly faulting in different parts of the TID list.

Maybe we could load it in a more compact form after the heap cleanup
pass, instead of a plain TID list.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Prevost 2007-08-30 16:07:47 Out of shared memory (locks per process) using table-inheritance style partitioning
Previous Message Madison Kelly 2007-08-30 16:01:06 Select question