On 26/04/12 13:11, Tom Lane wrote:
Toby Corkindale<toby.corkindale@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Just wondering if anyone else has thoughts on this?
I'm still suspicious that this is a bug.
Well, if you were to provide a reproducible test case, somebody might be
motivated to look into it. There could be a memory leak in the planner
somewhere, but without a test case it's not very practical to go look
for it.
Hi,
I've created a bit of a test case now.
There's a Perl script here:
http://dryft.net/postgres/
Running it will create a test database that's populated with quite a lot
of schemas and partitioned tables, and a few views.
Running EXPLAIN on the query on that database at the end added ~700MB to
the server-side postgres process.
It's not the same as 3.4GB I've seen on our bigger database warehouse,
but maybe it's enough to help?
Let me know if I can help elaborate further,
Toby
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
