| From: | ChatPristi <cchristo_0899(at)yahoo(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Fw: Re: Out of memory error with PG10.3, 10.4 but not 9.3.19 |
| Date: | 2018-06-06 20:08:04 |
| Message-ID: | 278674457.2034133.1528315684928@mail.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Forgotten to CC the list, sorry...
>Well, instead of an explain output which takes 2.4MB compressed and
>9.6MB uncompressed (take it as unreadable), could you produce a
>self-contained test case with a glimpse of the schema you are using?
>Where does the OOM happen, and how did you change your partitioned table
>schema? Are you using the native partitioning instead?
>Michael,
Thank you for your answer.
Sorry for the unreadable explain output.
I attached a SQL dump with 2 entities loaded in the database (2,872,265 entities in the actual database), the actual query and the actual output.
The OOM is durin the query (SELECT) after ~9 minutes the memory of the postgres increase until 8GB and the OOM message.
Partitioning is done by inherhitance.
After a complete reload of the database in PG10.4 the OOM still exists.
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| Archive.zip | application/zip | 67.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2018-06-06 20:21:05 | Re: Slow planning time for simple query |
| Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2018-06-06 19:12:34 | Re: Using distinct in an aggregate prevents parallel execution? |