| From: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Death postgres |
| Date: | 2023-05-06 14:19:24 |
| Message-ID: | 1e765391-d753-4a49-6dd2-7f99a5a55683@gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 5/6/23 08:52, Marc Millas wrote:
>
> Le sam. 6 mai 2023 à 15:15, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> a écrit :
>
>
[snip]
>
> If your question is about temp_file_limit, don't distract us with OOM
> issues.
>
> My question is how postgres can use space without caring about
> temp_file_limit. The oom info is kind of hint about the context as, as
> said, one select did generate both things
It's a distraction to lead with "OOM killed my process". Evidence of this
fact is that all respondents have talked about is memory, not disk space.
--
Born in Arizona, moved to Babylonia.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Guyot | 2023-05-06 14:48:18 | Re: Death postgres |
| Previous Message | Marc Millas | 2023-05-06 13:52:47 | Re: Death postgres |