Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table

From: Patrick Rotsaert <patrick(dot)rotsaert(at)arrowup(dot)be>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table
Date: 2006-02-01 16:57:50
Message-ID: 43E0E88E.50004@arrowup.be
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Tom Lane wrote:

>Patrick Rotsaert <patrick(dot)rotsaert(at)arrowup(dot)be> writes:
>
>
>>on 31/01/2006 16:18 Tom Lane wrote :
>>
>>
>>>http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/kernel-resources.html#AEN18105
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>But /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory reads `0', so my guess is that
>>overcommit is not enabled... right?
>>
>>
>
>Please read the reference I pointed you to.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
I did read it, very carefully. The proposed fix will only work in 2.6
kernels. Mine is a 2.4 and upgrading it is not an option. The document
suggests to look at the kernel source for 2.4 kernels. I did that, as I
wrote in the previous mail. Setting the overcommit parameter to '2', or
any value for that matter, won't do any good because in this kernel, it
is only tested if it is non-zero. On my system, the parameter is 0, so
overcommit is *not* enabled. I don't know what else I can do.
The other proposed option is to install more memory. Sorry, not an
option, 1GB has to be sufficient.

Apart from the overcommit subject, why is postgres consuming so much
memory? Should the solution of this problem not be searched for here?

Thanks,
Patrick Rotsaert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-02-01 17:19:55 Re: Bug in query planer ?
Previous Message Clifford Wolf 2006-02-01 16:44:10 Re: Bug in query planer ?