> killed
> > it after 15 minutes and no results...rather I tried to kill it, but
> it looks
> > like I'm going to have to -9 it...
>
> How big were the arrays you were trying to push around here? I tried
> interrupting a similar query and it came right back; but if you were
> building some really enormous arrays I could see the final array
> build loop taking awhile, and there's no CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in it...
>
> regards, tom lane
[Spotts, Christopher]
Like I'd said originally, there were no arrays that ended up being more 4
elements long - all integers. The vast majority of them were 1 or 2 long.
If it was having trouble allocating the memory for arrays, why doesn't using
a ARRAY(subselect) yield the same issue?
