| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Prabhat Sahu <prabhat(dot)sahu(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
| Date: | 2018-03-08 16:45:06 |
| Message-ID: | 6666.1520527506@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Prabhat Sahu <prabhat(dot)sahu(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 7:51 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> That looks like the background worker got killed by the OOM killer. How
>> much memory do you have in the machine where this occurred?
> I have ran the testcase in my local machine with below configurations:
> Environment: CentOS 7(64bit)
> HD : 100GB
> RAM: 4GB
> Processor: 4
If you only have 4GB of physical RAM, it hardly seems surprising that
trying to use 8GB of maintenance_work_mem would draw the wrath of the
OOM killer.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2018-03-08 16:57:05 | Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-03-08 16:30:10 | Re: Server won't start with fallback setting by initdb. |