I have few other applications running on my machine but they all don't use more than 60MB. I checked and SHMALL is in pages. I also reduced shared_buffers and max_connections but that didn't help. Also I did ipcs after I got the error and following is what I got -
T ID KEY MODE OWNER GROUP NATTCH SEGSZ CPID LPID ATIME DTIME CTIME
m 131072 2 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 6242304 67055 67055 14:13:34 14:13:34 14:13:34
m 131073 3 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 5234688 67057 67057 14:14:02 14:14:02 14:14:02
m 131074 4 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 4235264 67059 67059 14:14:30 14:14:30 14:14:30
m 131075 5 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 3203072 67061 67061 14:14:57 14:14:57 14:14:57
m 131076 6 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 2203648 67063 67063 14:15:25 14:15:25 14:15:25
m 131077 7 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 1687552 67072 67072 14:15:54 14:15:54 14:15:54
m 131078 8 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 36478976 67074 67074 14:16:22 14:16:22 14:16:22
m 131079 9 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 9592832 67086 67086 14:19:10 14:19:10 14:19:10
m 131080 10 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 1687552 67137 67137 14:23:50 14:23:50 14:23:50
m 131119 1 --rw------- pgsql pgsql 0 11321344 67053 67053 14:13:07 14:13:07 14:13:07
Postgres did create, attach, detach shared segments but did'nt delete them. I think these processes were forked by postmaster but why so many were created? and why those segments not reported?
Thanks,
Fahad
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 5:20 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hm, what else is running on the box? PG itself should fit in 256MB butquestions <questions.612@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I am getting this error with initdb while creating shared segment -
> "memory segment exceeded available memory or swap space. To reduce the
> request size (currently 1785856 bytes), reduce PostgreSQL's shared_buffers
> parameter (currently 50)) and/or its max_connections parameter (currently
> 13)."
> Total memory is 256 MB and memory available to user processes is 178 MB.
> It's not an issue with shared segment exceeding SHMMAX but value of SHMMAX
> is 67108864 and SHMALL is 8192. It is not exactly a Postgresql problem but
> what am I missing here?
if you've got other stuff hogging memory, you might have little choice
but to buy more RAM.
(You should also double-check what SHMALL is measured in on your
platform; maybe that 8192 isn't pages but bytes ...)
regards, tom lane
