[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-5866?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Tim Armstrong resolved IMPALA-5866.
-----------------------------------
       Resolution: Duplicate
    Fix Version/s: Impala 2.10.0

> Min reservation error message is slightly inaccurate
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: IMPALA-5866
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-5866
>             Project: IMPALA
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Frontend
>    Affects Versions: Impala 2.10.0
>            Reporter: Alexander Behm
>              Labels: bugbash-2017-08-30, usability
>             Fix For: Impala 2.10.0
>
>
> When I set the mem_limit to exactly the value suggested in the error message, 
> the query is still rejected. If I set the value slightly higher, then then 
> query runs.
> {code}
> set max_row_size=200m;
> set mem_limit=100m;
> select count(distinct l_shipdate) from lineitem;
> ERROR: Rejected query from pool root.default: minimum memory reservation is 
> greater than memory available to the query for buffer reservations. Mem 
> available for buffer reservations based on mem_limit: 100.00 MB, memory 
> reservation needed: 512.94 MB. Set mem_limit to at least 641.17 MB. See the 
> query profile for more information.
> set mem_limit=641.17m;
> select count(distinct l_shipdate) from lineitem;
> ERROR: Rejected query from pool root.default: minimum memory reservation is 
> greater than memory available to the query for buffer reservations. Mem 
> available for buffer reservations based on mem_limit: 641.17 MB, memory 
> reservation needed: 512.94 MB. Set mem_limit to at least 641.17 MB. See the 
> query profile for more information.
> {code}
> If I set the mem_limit to 641.18m, then the query runs fine. Maybe this is a 
> minor inconsistency/rounding/truncation issue between our reporting and our 
> parsing of the mem spec in the memory limit.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to