| From: | Tomas Szepe <szepe(at)pinerecords(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 8.3.0: vacuum full analyze: "invalid memory alloc request size" |
| Date: | 2008-02-10 19:31:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20080210193148.GB1560@louise.pinerecords.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
> Tomas Szepe <szepe(at)pinerecords(dot)com> writes:
> >> Are you doing anything that would involve lots of updates in these
> >> catalogs --- maybe repeatedly renaming a column, or something like that?
>
> > Hmm, I typically use a pair of
> > "ALTER TABLE table DISABLE TRIGGER USER;"/
> > "ALTER TABLE table ENABLE TRIGGER USER;"
> > per almost every relation when loading a dump, other than that there's
> > only the initial db creation code (lots of plpgsql triggers and a couple
> > immutable functions) and then using temp tables for complicated queries.
>
> Hm, those ALTERs wouldn't affect pg_attribute. Maybe just using a lot
> of temp tables is enough?
>
> Are you running with autovacuum on, or not?
At the moment autovacuum is off, but it _might_ have been on in the first
40 hours or so... Sorry, I can't say exactly.
--
Tomas Szepe <szepe(at)pinerecords(dot)com>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-10 20:18:35 | Re: 8.3.0: vacuum full analyze: "invalid memory alloc request size" |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-10 19:14:31 | Re: 8.3.0: vacuum full analyze: "invalid memory alloc request size" |