Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00EB62E0DD0 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:07:00 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 21388-06 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:06:57 -0400 (AST) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.244]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DB5A2E08D3 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:06:57 -0400 (AST) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b33so278172ana for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 07:06:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vDWM+V3lk/Q49FVC6a7NerxjCBP2vzM0ozJALQ2y2tM=; b=I4btdFdnWh0x+qsLi50AZIjbNB7bSEERcykxys4kjE/V68+9oFytfmrq3vQoshAncla7b9CNg0aNh2Qmbjw9BNUYJ83C5nvf+rapcz4c13oI4ROifbC96QgzZjyzbro9kpbeaRr054sUFY6TJmWPtnrUcOw8Eoqw8OVtQFa5pdo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=jjjIZV21uwQJlzwBRozYpmTUQjEiU5/g8K/k2YWmdDJYBiUBawQ/kF5wK9GicznZlBx5oMieCMDgwwVRZ3gKIDUgBuOwJSSBAhLSVVE2O5cHp+Ogfyrf5EUAqyy1LXXaWuYHwItPwt4C8/5elT0ce2fcOE766g4gF/RWwA+1oVw= Received: by 10.100.106.1 with SMTP id e1mr9934053anc.1194966416210; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 07:06:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.100? ( [89.251.0.64]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 33sm7911248nfu.2007.11.13.07.06.52 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 07:06:53 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4739BD8A.2080203@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:06:50 +0100 From: Stephane Bailliez User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: ERROR: "invalid memory alloc request size" or "unexpected end of data" on large table References: <4738B03C.8090901@gmail.com> <13448.1194908062@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <13448.1194908062@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200711/194 X-Sequence-Number: 27609 Tom Lane wrote: > This sounds like corrupt data --- specifically, 1664639562 showing > up where a variable-width field's length word ought to be. It > may or may not be relevant that the ASCII equivalent of that bit > pattern is Jb8c ... do you work with data that contains such > substrings? > Not specifically but I cannot rule it out entirely, it 'could' be in one of the column which may have a combination of uppercase/lowercase/number otherwise all other text entries would be lowercase. > If it's not 100% repeatable I'd start to wonder about flaky hardware. > Have you run memory and disk diagnostics on this machine recently? I did extensive tests a month or two ago (long crunching queries running non stop for 24h) which were ok but honestly cannot say I'm not very trusty in this particular hardware. Would need to put it offline and memtest it for good obviously. I moved some data (and a bit more, same table has 35M rows) to another machine (also 8.1.10 on ubuntu with 2.6.17-10 smp, 2 Xeon 2GHZ instead of P4 3GHz) and it passes with flying colors (though it's much much slower with the same settings so I need to check a few things in there, I had tmp dir topping 3GB so not sure if I could have more in memory) Thanks for the insight, Tom. -- stephane