On 1/17/2018 5:57 PM, scott ribe wrote:
On Jan 17, 2018, at 2:57 PM, Davlet Panech <dpanech@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Does my configuration look reasonable? I just don't understand how it could possibly use up 19 GB of memory based on the configuration below. Is there a memory leak in there somewhere?
It does seem awfully high, but... An update can involve a join across multiple tables. Or an update can run a trigger which can cascade. Either of those could result in an "accidental cross product" join, which can always blow up memory.
There must be a way to put an upper limit on memory even for such cases.
I was under the impression that parameters such as "work_mem" serve that
purpose, is that not the case? So an "accidental cross product" join's
memory usage is unbounded? It can't be... could somebody confirm this
please?
Thanks,
D.
