| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jakub Glapa <jakub(dot)glapa(at)gmail(dot)com>, Forums postgresql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ERROR: too many dynamic shared memory segments |
| Date: | 2017-11-27 19:16:25 |
| Message-ID: | 14346.1511810185@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Ah, so you have many Gather nodes under Append? That's one way to eat
> arbitrarily many DSM slots. We allow for 64 + 2 * max_backends. Does
> it help if you increase max_connections? I am concerned about the
> crash failure mode you mentioned in the first email though: we should
> always be able to handle that condition gracefully.
I suspect this is an instance of the issue I complained about before [1]
that parallel query is unable to cope with worker start failure.
regards, tom lane
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4905.1492813727@sss.pgh.pa.us
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-11-27 19:24:10 | Re: Setting a default for nextval sequence |
| Previous Message | Robert Lakes | 2017-11-27 19:13:08 | Setting a default for nextval sequence |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-11-27 19:18:17 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort for describe commands, when size is printed |
| Previous Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2017-11-27 19:10:57 | Re: [HACKERS] Fix performance degradation of contended LWLock on NUMA |