| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jason Lustig <lustig(at)brandeis(dot)edu>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Autovacuum running out of memory |
| Date: | 2007-10-16 15:10:17 |
| Message-ID: | 16500.1192547417@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> writes:
> Hmm - odd that you're not getting any connection details.
Not really; the autovacuum process doesn't have any connection, so those
log_line_prefix fields will be left empty. The weird thing about this
is why the large maintenance_work_mem works for a regular session and
not for autovacuum. There really shouldn't be much difference in the
maximum workable setting for the two cases, AFAICS.
Your later suggestion to check out the postgres user's ulimit -a
settings seems like the appropriate next step, but I'm not seeing
how ulimit would affect only some of the postmaster's children.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-10-16 15:22:48 | Re: using a stored proc that returns a result set in a complex SQL stmt |
| Previous Message | Rodrigo Gonzalez | 2007-10-16 15:00:36 | Re: Autovacuum running out of memory |