| From: | Wes Palmer <Wesley(dot)R(dot)Palmer(at)syntegra(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Eric Ridge <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com>, Pgsql-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cursors and Transactions, why? |
| Date: | 2004-04-07 14:11:28 |
| Message-ID: | BC997640.C32D%Wesley.R.Palmer@syntegra.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 4/6/04 11:09 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> What "out of memory thing"? The tuplestore code is perfectly capable of
> spilling to disk --- in fact the usual performance gripe against it has
> to do with spilling too soon, because sort_mem is set too small.
I tried doing a mass update of all rows with a single SQL statement in psql
and after it ran for many hours, I got 'out of memory'. I didn't try that
using C and WITH HOLD. I assumed it ran out of swap space, but was sleeping
at the time.
Wes
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2004-04-07 14:12:26 | Re: Can we have time based triggers in Postgresql?? |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-04-07 13:56:57 | Re: Can the username calling a function be made available within the function? |