Re: Why would this use 600Meg of VM? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Philip Warner
Subject Re: Why would this use 600Meg of VM?
Date
Msg-id 3.0.5.32.20010624154552.0234ae00@mail.rhyme.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why would this use 600Meg of VM?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Why would this use 600Meg of VM?  (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>)
Re: Why would this use 600Meg of VM?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
At 01:06 24/06/01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>The answer: the query has nothing to do with it.  However, the
>deferred triggers you have on the target relation have a lot to do
>with it.  It's all deferred-trigger-event storage.

Would it be worth using a local (system) temporary table for this sort of
thing?


----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)          |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81         |                 _________  \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82         |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|                                |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Why would this use 600Meg of VM?
Next
From: "Bernardo Pons"
Date:
Subject: RE: Extracting metadata about attributes from catalog