| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Toby Corkindale <toby(dot)corkindale(at)strategicdata(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Bug? Query plans / EXPLAIN using gigabytes of memory |
| Date: | 2012-04-26 05:30:14 |
| Message-ID: | 24055.1335418214@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Toby Corkindale <toby(dot)corkindale(at)strategicdata(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> On 26/04/12 13:11, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, if you were to provide a reproducible test case, somebody might be
>> motivated to look into it. There could be a memory leak in the planner
>> somewhere, but without a test case it's not very practical to go look
>> for it.
> Would a Perl-based script that built up a database like that be a useful
> test case for you?
Yeah, sure, just something that somebody else can run to duplicate the
problem.
> For what it's worth, I discovered something quite interesting. The
> memory usage only blows out when I do an update based on the results of
> the query.
Hm, is the update target an inheritance tree?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Toby Corkindale | 2012-04-26 06:14:14 | Re: Bug? Query plans / EXPLAIN using gigabytes of memory |
| Previous Message | Toby Corkindale | 2012-04-26 05:09:38 | Re: Bug? Query plans / EXPLAIN using gigabytes of memory |