On 12 June 2015 at 00:29, Tomas Vondra <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I see two ways to fix this: > > (1) enforce the 1GB limit (probably better for back-patching, if that's > necessary) > > (2) make it work with hash tables over 1GB > > I'm in favor of (2) if there's a good way to do that. It seems a bit > stupid not to be able to use fast hash table because there's some > artificial limit. Are there any fundamental reasons not to use the > MemoryContextAllocHuge fix, proposed by KaiGai-san? If there are no objections, I will apply the patch for 2) to HEAD and backpatch to 9.5. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
