From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 29 15:21:47 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DB7116A41C for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:21:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD55D43D1F for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:21:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j5TFLfut009732; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:21:41 -0400 (EDT) To: Sven Willenberger In-reply-to: <1120055305.19603.25.camel@lanshark.dmv.com> References: <1120050088.19603.7.camel@lanshark.dmv.com> <1120055305.19603.25.camel@lanshark.dmv.com> Comments: In-reply-to Sven Willenberger message dated "Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:28:24 -0400" Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:21:41 -0400 Message-ID: <9731.1120058501@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane Cc: stable@freebsd.org, pgsql-general@postgresql.org, Douglas McNaught Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL's vacuumdb fails to allocate memory for X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:21:47 -0000 Sven Willenberger writes: > ERROR: out of memory > DETAIL: Failed on request of size 536870910. That's a server-side failure ... > Again, if I log in as myself and try to run > the command vaccumdb -a -z it fails; if I su to root and repeat it works > fine. I am trying to narrow this down to a PostgreSQL issue vs FreeBSD > issue. That's fairly hard to believe, assuming that you are talking to the same server in both cases (I have seen trouble reports that turned out to be because the complainant was accidentally using two different servers...) The ulimit the backend is running under couldn't change depending on where the client is su'd to. Is it possible that you've got per-user configuration settings that affect this, like a different maintenance_mem value for the root user? regards, tom lane