| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Kalchev <daniel(at)digsys(dot)bg> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: (resolution?) Re: [HACKERS] memory problem again |
| Date: | 1999-12-07 23:16:17 |
| Message-ID: | 199912072316.SAA13688@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> (another not related bug, but still on memory allocation)
> Still - this does not explain why postgres cannot allocated more than 76 MB
> (according to top) on BSD/OS (never did, actually - any previous version too),
> while a simple malloc(1 MB) loop allocates up to the process limit.
>
> Maybe at some time postrges tries to allocate 'larger' chunk, which the BSD/OS
> malloc does not like?
>
You can easily put in errlog(NOTICE...) and dump out the allocations to
see what is being requested. It is also possible TOP display is not
accurate in some way. Does ps vm flags show this too?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-12-08 00:23:55 | Re: [HACKERS] Table aliases in delete statements? |
| Previous Message | Jeff MacDonald <jeff@pgsql.com> | 1999-12-07 23:15:40 | Re: [GENERAL] Oft Ask: How to contribute to PostgreSQL? |