Re: Seg fault when processing large SPI cursor (PG9.13)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Seg fault when processing large SPI cursor (PG9.13) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7307.1362413076@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Seg fault when processing large SPI cursor (PG9.13) ("Fields, Zachary J. (MU-Student)" <zjfe58@mail.missouri.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: Seg fault when processing large SPI cursor (PG9.13)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Fields, Zachary J. (MU-Student)" <zjfe58@mail.missouri.edu> writes: > I'm working on PostgreSQL 9.13 (waiting for admin to push upgrades next week), in the meanwhile, I was curious if thereare any known bugs regarding large cursor fetches, or if I am to blame. > My cursor has 400 million records, and I'm fetching in blocks of 2^17 (approx. 130K). When I fetch the next block afterprocessing the 48,889,856th record, then the DB seg faults. It should be noted, I have processed tables with 23 million+records several times and everything appears to work great. > I have watched top, and the system memory usage gets up to 97.6% (from approx 30 million records onward - then sways upand down), but ultimately crashes when I try to get past the 48,889,856th record. I have tried odd and various block sizes,anything greater than 2^17 crashes at the fetch that would have it surpassed 48,889,856 records, 2^16 hits the samesweet spot, and anything less than 2^16 actually crashes slightly earlier (noted in comments in code below). > To me, it appears to be an obvious memory leak, Well, you're leaking the SPITupleTables (you should be doing SPI_freetuptable when done with each one), so running out of memory is not exactly surprising. I suspect what is happening is that an out-of-memory error is getting thrown and recovery from that is messed up somehow. Have you tried getting a stack trace from the crash? I note that you're apparently using C++. C++ in the backend is rather dangerous, and one of the main reasons is that C++ error handling doesn't play nice with elog/ereport error handling. It's possible to make it work safely but it takes a lot of attention and extra code, which you don't seem to have here. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: