On 2018/11/06 13:21, Inoue, Hiroshi wrote:
> Hi Markus,
>
> On 2018/11/06 7:34, Markus Angst wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Postgres 10.4 64bit on Windows
>> psqlODBC 10.03.0000
>> - Use Declare/Fetch is off
>> - Cache size is 10'000'000
>>
>> Issuing a simple select statement with Microsoft Access gives me the
>> following ODBC error:
>>
>> "Out of memory while reading tuples.; memory allocation error??? (#4)"
>>
>> The statement returns 822701 rows (via JDBC), average row size is 100
>> bytes.
>>
>> On https://odbc.postgresql.org/docs/config.html it says:
>> "Cache Size: When using cursors, this is the row size of the tuple
>> cache. If not using cursors, this is how many tuples to allocate
>> memory for at any given time. The default is 100 rows for either case."
>
> Hmm, it seems a documentation bug to me.
>
> "If not using cursors, this is how many tuples to allocate memory at
> first."
>
> seems correct.
Oops, I was wrong.
"If not using cursors, this has no meaning."
seems right.
>
> So "Cache size" doesn't have much meaning if *Use Declare/Fetch* is off.
> I think there's no way to avoid *Out of memory while reading tuples*
> errors
> in *Use Declare/Fetch* off mode unfortunately.
>
> regards,
> Hiroshi inoue
>
>>
>>
>> Setting the field to the aforementioned 10'000'000 does not help. Is
>> this value ignored? Is there a maximum value for Cache size? How is
>> the tuple size calculated?
>>
>> Setting Use Declare/Fetch is not an option. Access can have severe
>> problems with this setting; an experience I don't want to repeat.
>>
>> My plan B would be to select the data in several pieces, which would
>> be much more complicated in this particular case.
>>
>> What else can I do?
>>
>> Thanks and best regards
>> Markus Angst
---
このメールは、AVG によってウイルス チェックされています。
http://www.avg.com