On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
Are you *sure* there are no AFTER triggers here?
(Don't forget foreign-key checking triggers.)
This is all of them ... nothing AFTER, just ON or BEFORE ...
Foreign-key
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Are you *sure* there are no AFTER triggers here?
>> (Don't forget foreign-key checking triggers.)
> This is all of them ... nothing AFTER, just ON or BEFORE ...
> Foreign-key constraints:
> "xa_classific
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
'k, does this help any?
TopMemoryContext: 40960 total in 4 blocks; 8632 free (10 chunks); 32328 used
SPI Plan: 3072 total in 2 blocks; 1728 free (0 chunks); 1344 used
TopTransactionContext: 534765568 total in
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 'k, does this help any?
> TopMemoryContext: 40960 total in 4 blocks; 8632 free (10 chunks); 32328 used
> SPI Plan: 3072 total in 2 blocks; 1728 free (0 chunks); 1344 used
> TopTransactionContext: 534765568 total in 74 blocks; 2144 free (68 chunks);
Just as a reminder, this is an 8.0.0 install, so if you think this might
have been fixed in later sub-releases, plesae let me know and I'll
upgrade/test again ...
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
If you've got any AFTER UPDATE triggers on that table, you could be
running out of memory for the pending-triggers list.
No
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If you've got any AFTER UPDATE triggers on that table, you could be
>> running out of memory for the pending-triggers list.
> Nope, only have a BEFORE UPDATE, or would that be similar except for at
> which po
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> An out-of-memory error should result in a long report in the postmaster
>> log about how many bytes in each memory context --- can you post that?
> This is all I'm seeing in the logs:
> # grep "\[653\]" pgsql
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
If you've got any AFTER UPDATE triggers on that table, you could be
running out of memory for the pending-triggers list.
Nope, only have a BEFORE UPDATE, or would that be
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The table contains ~10 million rows:
# time psql -c "UPDATE xa_url SET url = url;" -U pgsql pareto
ERROR: out of memory
DETAIL: Failed on request of size 32.
If you've got any AFTER UPDATE triggers on tha
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The table contains ~10 million rows:
> # time psql -c "UPDATE xa_url SET url = url;" -U pgsql pareto
> ERROR: out of memory
> DETAIL: Failed on request of size 32.
If you've got any AFTER UPDATE triggers on that table, you could be
running out of
The table contains ~10 million rows:
# time psql -c "UPDATE xa_url SET url = url;" -U pgsql pareto
ERROR: out of memory
DETAIL: Failed on request of size 32.
0.000u 0.022s 2:41:14.76 0.0% 88+66k 12+0io 19pf+0w
And the server is running:
PostgreSQL 8.0.0 on i386-portbld-freebsd4.10, compil
12 matches
Mail list logo
