From: | Ben Chobot <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: invalid memory alloc request size |
Date: | 2011-12-27 17:34:34 |
Message-ID: | AD34DAB6-E1F8-421E-BA5D-D3BC53469D89@silentmedia.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Dec 26, 2011, at 8:08 AM, Ben Chobot wrote:
> Yesterday I had a problem on a 64-bit 9.1.1 install:
>
> # select version();
> version
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> PostgreSQL 9.1.1 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc-4.6.real (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.1-9ubuntu3) 4.6.1, 64-bit
> (1 row)
>
>
> The logs showed this anomaly:
>
> 2011-12-25T19:33:18+00:00 pgdb2-vpc postgres[27546]: [74474-1] ERROR: invalid memory alloc request size 18446744073709551613
> 2011-12-25T19:33:18+00:00 pgdb2-vpc postgres[27546]: [74474-2] STATEMENT: SELECT * FROM "asset_user_accesses" WHERE ("asset_user_accesses"."asset_code" = 'assignments:course_141208' AND "asset_user_accesses"."user_id" = 618503) LIMIT 1;
>
>
> Googling around, it sounds like this is often due to table corruption, which would be unfortunate, but usually seems to be repeatable. I can re-run that query without issue, and in fact can select * from the entire table without issue. I do see the row was updated a few minutes after this error, so is it wishful thinking that vacuum came around and successfully removed the old, corrupted row version?
It also happens that 18446744073709551613 is -3 in 64-bit 2's complement if it was unsigned. Is it possible that -3 was some error return code that got cast and then passed directly to malloc()?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2011-12-27 18:30:10 | Detecting uncommitted changes |
Previous Message | david.sahagian | 2011-12-27 16:33:46 | not-always-full vacuuming in 9.0 ? |