Re: [INTERFACES] Front end memory consumption in SELECT - Mailing list pgsql-interfaces

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [INTERFACES] Front end memory consumption in SELECT
Date
Msg-id 6505.943079195@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Front end memory consumption in SELECT  (Douglas Thomson <dougt@mugc.cc.monash.edu.au>)
Responses Re: [INTERFACES] Front end memory consumption in SELECT
List pgsql-interfaces
Douglas Thomson <dougt@mugc.cc.monash.edu.au> writes:
> However, judging by the memory consumption of my front-end process,
> it would seem that the SELECT is loading the entire table into memory
> before I even fetch the first row! Can anyone confirm that this is in
> fact what goes on?

libpq handles SELECTs that way.  You should consider DECLARE CURSOR
and FETCH if you need to retrieve a large query result in chunks.

It was probably bad design for libpq to offer random access to query
results --- I'm sure there are few applications that really care,
and the memory-consumption problem is a very real one for many apps.
But I see no way to fix it without fundamental changes to libpq's API,
and it's not clear it's worth that kind of pain.  Maybe there will
be a deliberately-incompatible libpq Mark II someday ... or maybe we'll
switch to a whole new client interface like CORBA.

> If so, is there any way to avoid it? The obvious solution would seem
> to be to use LIMIT and OFFSET to get just a few thousand rows at a
> time, but will that suffer from a time overhead while the backend
> skips over millions of rows to get to the ones it needs??

Yes.  See the CURSOR stuff instead.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-interfaces by date:

Previous
From: "Sergio A. Kessler"
Date:
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] pg_pwd
Next
From: Peter Mount
Date:
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] JDBC compliancy question