pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 17:15:17 -0500
Message-ID: <5626BCF5.1090303@BlueTreble.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <32132.1444000256@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <5601D354.5000703@BlueTreble.com>
	<CAM3SWZTOjkP9EJsaUcvhpHxXfdCyXbCcFuTDNT4Qct90ZMU8Hw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM3SWZTJEPY7A5HBJMB-s6rhZxk8LXiaxZPAMDytBpLs3P60Tw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM3SWZQBf6nepv2PKm_PDqwxUzxgzp5664bmRpq4AhSTM2UX_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5913.1443822154@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAM3SWZQjp_W4bZC=BgEQrP3EXrEnOzaytkJZbntdmZe8f2EOBQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM3SWZTahp86i-5vDnfL5nzYCUjdmRu=sWRKXEZVd3E9dKGEFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM3SWZTwNKkeCN+n_ew2eLFrWT9+UcPRLUTyy_xWN12QzGORsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<9935.1443828452@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAM3SWZTZfwJRBv85XHcbc-TRhM4xsOD6fYfU3anF9WVTNeRUFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<32385.1443976035@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAM3SWZRH8=6P8=eicmOFAY+WROV_5giezZc=LnoUUtFYRYG0pg@mail.gmail.com>
	<26165.1443988873@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CAM3SWZRYvummSEJiNzJEnLqp5T6_66wAF5Sj32AivPAa5kVJSA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM3SWZQ2S7kDr9qaOms! EsotqPR0XU2Gzc8oavw_HvMpSkvPBPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<30415.1443996994@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<5611AF21.9090900@d! unslane.net>
	<32132.1444000256@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

On 10/4/15 6:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net>  writes:
>> >Sorry, I'm a bit late to this party. Does what you have committed mean
>> >people are less likely to see "Out of Memory" coming from
>> >pg_stat_statements? If not, what can be done about them short of a
>> >restart? And what bad effects follow from an event generating them?
> The main thing we've done that will alleviate that is increase the size of
> query text file that the garbage-collection routine can cope with from
> MaxAllocSize (1GB) to MaxAllocHugeSize (at least 2GB, lots more on 64bit
> machines, though on 32-bit you probably can't get to 2GB anyway ...).

FWIW, I've verified on $CLIENT's system that this works as Tom 
described. The truncation happened somewhere a bit north of 3GB, which 
seems odd as this is a 64 bit system. But at least there were no OOM errors.
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (49+ messages)

Message-ID: <5626BCF5.1090303@BlueTreble.com>
Permalink:  ../5626BCF5.1090303@BlueTreble.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/5626BCF5.1090303@BlueTreble.com

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew@dunslane.net, pg@heroku.com
  Subject: Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements
  In-Reply-To: <5626BCF5.1090303@BlueTreble.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox