From: | "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Query Failed, out of memory |
Date: | 2006-10-05 16:12:56 |
Message-ID: | 18166.24.91.171.78.1160064776.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:
>> psql -p 5435 -U pgsql -t -A -c "select client, item, rating, day from
>> ratings order by client" netflix > netflix.txt
>
>> My question, it looks like the kernel killed psql, and not postmaster.
>
> Not too surprising.
>
>> Question, is this a bug in psql?
>
> It's really a libpq design issue: since libpq provides random access to
> a PGresult, and has no mechanism for handling failures after returning
> the PGresult to the client, it has to slurp the whole query result into
> memory first.
>
> FWIW, there's a feature in CVS HEAD to instruct psql to try to use a
> cursor to break up huge query results like this. For the moment I'd
> suggest using COPY instead.
That's sort of what I was afraid off. I am trying to get 100 million
records into a text file in a specific order.
Sigh, I have to write a quick program to use a cursor. :-(
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Woodward | 2006-10-05 16:15:09 | Re: Query Failed, out of memory |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-05 16:01:24 | Re: Query Failed, out of memory |