| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matt Magoffin <postgresql(dot)org(at)msqr(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Out of memory on SELECT in 8.3.5 |
| Date: | 2009-02-09 07:12:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20090209071217.GB8123@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
* Matt Magoffin (postgresql(dot)org(at)msqr(dot)us) wrote:
> > I think it must be compiled 64-bit, or he'd not be able to get
> > shared_buffers that high to start with. However, it's possible that the
> > postmaster's been started under a ulimit setting that constrains each
> > backend to just a few hundred meg of per-process memory.
>
> Here's the output of ulimit -a by the "postgres" user the database is
> running under:
[...]
> I think this means it does not have an artificial memory limit imposed,
> but is there a specific setting beyond these I could check do you think?
How about cat /proc/<pid>/limits for the postmaster?
And maybe:
status
stat
maps
Though I'm kinda grasping at straws here, to be honest. I've had PG up
and running through >16G of memory at a time before.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2009-02-09 07:14:56 | Re: Out of memory on SELECT in 8.3.5 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-02-09 07:10:50 | Re: Out of memory on SELECT in 8.3.5 |