On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> vacuumlo is rather simpleminded about dealing with the list of LOs to be
>> removed - it just fetches them as a straight resultset. For one of my our
>> this resulted in an out of m
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> vacuumlo is rather simpleminded about dealing with the list of LOs to be
> removed - it just fetches them as a straight resultset. For one of my our
> this resulted in an out of memory condition.
Wow, they must have had a ton of LOs. With a
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:21:11PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 06/29/2013 11:35 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 11:33:54AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >>Nobody seemed interested. But I do think it's a good idea still.
> >Well, if no one replied, and you thought it wa
On 06/29/2013 11:35 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 11:33:54AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Nobody seemed interested. But I do think it's a good idea still.
Well, if no one replied, and you thought it was a good idea, then it was
a good idea. ;-)
I try not to assume that
On 06/29/2013 08:35 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 11:33:54AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Nobody seemed interested. But I do think it's a good idea still.
Well, if no one replied, and you thought it was a good idea, then it was
a good idea. ;-)
I think it is a good id
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 11:33:54AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Nobody seemed interested. But I do think it's a good idea still.
Well, if no one replied, and you thought it was a good idea, then it was
a good idea. ;-)
--
Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB
Nobody seemed interested. But I do think it's a good idea still.
cheers
andrew
On 06/29/2013 11:23 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Is there a reason this patch was not applied?
---
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 05:14:57PM -0500, A
Is there a reason this patch was not applied?
---
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 05:14:57PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> vacuumlo is rather simpleminded about dealing with the list of LOs
> to be removed - it just fetches them as
vacuumlo is rather simpleminded about dealing with the list of LOs to be
removed - it just fetches them as a straight resultset. For one of my
our this resulted in an out of memory condition. The attached patch
tries to remedy that by using a cursor instead. If this is wanted I will
add it to t
