Johann Spies writes:
> On 25 August 2017 at 13:48, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Remember that "work_mem" is "work memory per plan node", so a complex
>> query could easily chew up a multiple of that number --- and that's
>> with everything going according to
On 25 August 2017 at 13:48, Tom Lane wrote:
> How complex is "complex"? I can think of two likely scenarios:
> 1. You've stumbled across some kind of memory-leak bug in Postgres.
> 2. The query's just using too much memory. In this connection, it's
> not good that you've
Johann Spies writes:
> While restoring a dump from our development server (768G ram) to the
> production server, (PG 9.6.3 on Debian Stretch with 128G Ram) the
> refreshing of a Materialized View fails like this:
> local] js@wos=# REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW
## Johann Spies (johann.sp...@gmail.com):
> --
> 2017-08-24 19:23:26 SAST [7532-18] LOG: server process (PID 4890) was
> terminated by signal 9: Killed
That looks like out-of-memory. Check the kernel log/dmesg to verify.
If it's the dreaded OOM-killer, you should check your
While restoring a dump from our development server (768G ram) to the
production server, (PG 9.6.3 on Debian Stretch with 128G Ram) the
refreshing of a Materialized View fails like this:
local] js@wos=# REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW wos_2017_1.citation_window_mv ;
server closed the connection