| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Emmanuel Cecchet <Emmanuel(dot)Cecchet(at)asterdata(dot)com>, Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Partitioning option for COPY |
| Date: | 2009-11-17 16:41:48 |
| Message-ID: | 29961.1258476108@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Cache? Why do you need a cache for COPY?
> Actually the cache is only activated if you use the partitioning option.
> It is just a list of oids of child tables where tuples were inserted.
Umm ... why is that useful enough to be cached?
> Why do I get this segfault if I use memory from CacheMemoryContext?
Well, CacheMemoryContext will never be reset, so either you freed the
data structure yourself or there's something wrong with the pointer
you think is pointing at the data structure ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Valtonen, Hannu | 2009-11-17 16:48:36 | plpythonu DO support (inline call handler) |
| Previous Message | Sergey Konoplev | 2009-11-17 16:37:33 | Re: Unpredictable shark slowdown after migrating to 8.4 |