>I tried the same thing, except I simply put a loop around the begin/end
>transaction part of testlo.c so that it would create and access many
>large objects in a single backend process.  With today's sources I do
>not see a 'ShmemAlloc: out of memory' error even after several thousand
>iterations.  (But I do not know if this test would have triggered one
>before...)

Was something changed in the LO?  I will take it down again and try
with my data set again (~250M) and let yall know what happens.  I have
solved my problem by taking the transaction out of the program,  so I
think that the error is in there somewhere.  Like I said,  I will try
it and post later with my results...

- Brandon


------------------------------------------------------
Smith Computer Lab Administrator,
Case Western Reserve University
     bap@scl.cwru.edu
     216 - 368 - 5066
     http://cwrulug.cwru.edu
------------------------------------------------------

PGP Public Key Fingerprint: 1477 2DCF 8A4F CA2C  8B1F 6DFE 3B7C FDFB



Mon, 31 May 1999 19:02:18 -0400
"Brandon Palmer" <bap@scl.cwru.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] Problems w/ LO