Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Patrick Rotsaert
Subject Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table
Date
Msg-id 43E0E88E.50004@arrowup.be
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table
Re: BUG #2225: Backend crash -- BIG table
List pgsql-bugs
Tom Lane wrote:

>Patrick Rotsaert <patrick.rotsaert@arrowup.be> writes:
>
>
>>on 31/01/2006 16:18 Tom Lane wrote :
>>
>>
>>>http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/kernel-resources.html#AEN18105
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>But /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory  reads `0', so my guess is that
>>overcommit is not enabled... right?
>>
>>
>
>Please read the reference I pointed you to.
>
>            regards, tom lane
>
>
I did read it, very carefully. The proposed fix will only work in 2.6
kernels. Mine is a 2.4 and upgrading it is not an option. The document
suggests to look at the kernel source for 2.4 kernels. I did that, as I
wrote in the previous mail. Setting the overcommit parameter to '2', or
any value for that matter, won't do any good because in this kernel, it
is only tested if it is non-zero. On my system, the parameter is 0, so
overcommit is *not* enabled. I don't know what else I can do.
The other proposed option is to install more memory. Sorry, not an
option, 1GB has to be sufficient.

Apart from the overcommit subject, why is postgres consuming so much
memory? Should the solution of this problem not be searched for here?

Thanks,
Patrick Rotsaert

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: "Peter Stys"
Date:
Subject: BUG #2233: Not a bug - trying to make a donation
Next
From: Stephan Szabo
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #2231: Incorrect Order By