From: | "Angva" <angvaw(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: out of memory woes |
Date: | 2006-12-18 15:16:56 |
Message-ID: | 1166455016.067279.221080@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> OK, I played around with this for a bit, and what I find is that in 8.1,
> that SPIExec context is where the sort operation run by CLUSTER's
> reindexing step allocates memory.
Interesting. I wonder if dropping indexes could alleviate this problem.
Please see another recent post of mine for context -
http://groups.google.com/group/pgsql.general/browse_thread/thread/26333d69d7a311ed/39fcfa7ca91771ba?lnk=gst&q=index+angva&rnum=2
The indexes (except for the cluster indexes obviously) should be
dropped and recreated later anyway.
> I don't know why it sometimes fails and sometimes not ---
> maybe you are reaching the swap-space limits of
> the machine when you do several of these in parallel?
The funny thing is that once it does fail, it fails consistently until
the server is bounced - I must have run the cluster script 10 times
after the initial failure. The server's 6g of RAM is normally more than
enough (so normally, maintenance_work_mem is not too high) until this
strange wall is hit. Another funny thing is that according to top, no
more than about 700k of swap is ever used - even when the problem
occurs - and the limit is 2g.
Thanks a lot,
Mark
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marco Bizzarri | 2006-12-18 15:29:17 | Re: permission in the db or in the application? |
Previous Message | Matt Miller | 2006-12-18 14:56:59 | pgcluster-1.7.0rc1-patch |