[felt free to cc the monetdb-developers list as more people might be
interested or want to contribute]
Henning,
are you just "concerned" or are you having concrete problems with the bat
sizes?
In cany case, to give any reasonable answer we'd need to know more about the
details. In particular how large is the BAT your talking about.
I.e., with "b" being your BAT and "c := b.copy()", please check & report
b.count();
b.info().reverse().like("batBuns").like("size").print();
b.batsize();
b.batdsksize();
c.count();
c.info().reverse().like("batBuns").like("size").print();
c.batsize();
c.batdsksize();
Stefan
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 01:47:01PM +0200, Henning Rode wrote:
> hej stefan,
>
> thanks for the answer. so in conclusion, the over-allocation of memory
> is quite normal, and nothing to worry about.
>
> i was more surprised that the copied BAT still has this considerable
> over-allocation of memory, though it exactly knows how many entries it
> needs to hold.
>
> groeten -henning
--
| Dr. Stefan Manegold | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| CWI, P.O.Box 94079 | http://www.cwi.nl/~manegold/ |
| 1090 GB Amsterdam | Tel.: +31 (20) 592-4212 |
| The Netherlands | Fax : +31 (20) 592-4312 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Monetdb-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers
