From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Olarte <olarte(dot)andres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Kris Jurka" <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, "Kai Ruhl" <k(dot)ruhl(at)etamax(dot)de>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: JVM crash when select count(*) on large table through JDBC |
Date: | 2008-02-22 21:13:18 |
Message-ID: | 6CA15016-F105-4963-B9B2-3462EA2B3B53@fastcrypt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
As Kris said and I said. If your jvm crashes it's a jvm problem.
I know people that have queries that take 20 minutes or more...
Dave
On 22-Feb-08, at 3:39 PM, Andres Olarte wrote:
> I know it's the same to count 1 o 20M rows, but it takes much longer
> to count 20M. I really don't know much about the internal of the
> driver, but maybe some kind of time out?
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Andres Olarte wrote:
>>
>>> Just did a quick test with synthetic data (20M rows 3 columns:
>>> serial,
>>> timestamp, and text). And it worked ok both on Java (with driver
>>> postgresql-8.1-407.jdbc3.jar) and PgAdmin.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you could try to build a test case to expose the problem?
>>
>> From a client perspective, select count(*) should be the same no
>> matter
>> how many rows there are and what types of columns are in the table,
>> so a
>> test case won't be helpful. If the JVM is just up and dying,
>> that's the
>> JVM's fault not a pg issue.
>>
>> Kris Jurka
>>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | shah exports | 2008-02-23 13:15:09 | Request for JDBC support |
Previous Message | Andres Olarte | 2008-02-22 20:39:54 | Re: JVM crash when select count(*) on large table through JDBC |