| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lonni J Friedman <netllama(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: multiple runs of the same query cause out of memory - WAS [Re: capturing/viewing sort_mem utilization on a per query basis] |
| Date: | 2005-02-24 00:56:56 |
| Message-ID: | 23880.1109206616@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Lonni J Friedman <netllama(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> We have found that this query can indeed cause terrible things to
> happen to postgresql - it can run several times with response times of
> a few seconds, and then the next time cause postgres to go out of
> control on memory usage. (I've had to reboot my machine twice to get
> control). On a beefier machine with more memory and two CPUs, the
> query worked okay for a few dozen repetitions (with a few in
> parallel), then eventually one instance would cause the postgres
> process to spiral out of control and consume more
> and more memory at the rate of a megabyte every second or so.
> I'm not quite sure where to go from here, but this is definitely
> reproducable now. Help?!
That's a bit hard to believe --- if nothing is changing, the query
should get processed the same way every time.
Can you package up a test case for other people to look at?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2005-02-24 01:04:45 | Re: ideally a non-volatile function? |
| Previous Message | Lonni J Friedman | 2005-02-24 00:45:04 | multiple runs of the same query cause out of memory - WAS [Re: capturing/viewing sort_mem utilization on a per query basis] |