| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Carrington, Matthew (Produban)" <Matthew(dot)Carrington(at)Produban(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade: out of memory |
| Date: | 2012-09-21 14:57:53 |
| Message-ID: | 6577.1348239473@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Carrington, Matthew (Produban)" <Matthew(dot)Carrington(at)Produban(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> As its AIX I don't have top but using topas and comparing it to other processes running a successful pg_dumpall doesn't get very large at all.
Hmm. Best guess at this point is that there's some specific DDL in your
database that confuses some recent change in pg_dump. Can you try to
narrow down what it is? Try taking a pg_dump -s (schema only) from
the cahoot_monitoring database, load parts of that into a scratch
database, see if 9.2 pg_dump fails on that. Alternatively, if there's
nothing terribly sensitive in your DDL, maybe you could send me the
pg_dump -s output off-list?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Anibal David Acosta | 2012-09-21 15:06:44 | Re: [ADMIN] Windows Services and Postgresql 9.1.3 |
| Previous Message | salah jubeh | 2012-09-21 14:32:55 | 9.1 vs 8.4 performance |