Re: Incremental View Maintenance: ERROR: out of shared memory

From: Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, legrand_legrand(at)hotmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Incremental View Maintenance: ERROR: out of shared memory
Date: 2020-01-17 08:33:48
Message-ID: 20200117173348.8e3e8e27010b6ac24064286d@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 12:27:13 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> >> here is an unexpected error found while testing IVM v11 patches
> >> ...
> >> ERROR: out of shared memory
>
> > I think we could avoid such an error in IVM by reusing a temp table in
> > a session or a transaction.
>
> I'm more than a little bit astonished that this proposed patch is
> creating temp tables at all. ISTM that that implies that it's
> being implemented at the wrong level of abstraction, and it will be
> full of security problems, as well as performance problems above
> and beyond the one described here.

We realized that there is also other problems in using temp tables
as pointed out in another thread. So, we are now working on rewrite
our patch not to use temp tables.

Regards,
Yugo Nagata

--
Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2020-01-17 09:17:44 Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Previous Message asaba.takanori@fujitsu.com 2020-01-17 08:29:15 RE: Complete data erasure