Unlock a world of possibilities! Login now and discover the exclusive benefits awaiting you.
Hi all.
Two tables are to be conjoined by a CONCATENATE.
The first table exists of 6 mio. rows and the second of 6½ mio. rows.
When doing a normal CONCATENATE the RAM explodes (+60 GB), but when doing the same CONCATENATE with a FIRST-command (FIRST 1000000000) on the second table the RAM-usage is as expected (about 5 GB).
We are running QV 11.2 - any known reason for this behavior, besides a bug?
It is a bug in QV11 SR2 - upgrading to SR5 could be a solution (work around: use a FIRST-command in the script):
Bug 60817: Memory consumption very high in 11.20 on a machine with high number of cores
According to the more detailed description:
Reloading a document on a machine with less numbers of cores leaves a memory usage of 21.5gb post reload, reloading the same document on a machine with a high number of cores consumes 110 gb of memory. The application uses a concatenate load.
its not a bug.
your script is going wrong somewhere.
you can check the script that u have all the fields with same name in the both table.
also check your datamodel, that after concatenation there should be only one table.
-Nilesh
Hi Nilesh.
Thanks, but names are uniform, and only one table is left after the concatenate.
I'm not sure how you know it's not a bug. It's working with an arbitrary FIRST-command added, that is a little strange to me. Without the FIRST-command the RAM-usage explodes, and not because the script is loading different or more data.
Temp:
LOAD
A,
B,
C
FROM A1.qvd (qvd) ;
CONCATENATE (Temp)
FIRST 1000000
LOAD
A,
B
FROM A2.qvd (qvd) ;
Hi,
a little note:
in your post you wrote First 100 Mio
in your script you have First 1 (one) Mio
Only typo? If not, everthing is as expected.
RR
Hi Roland.
Thanks. Just a typo/example script. In the live script it's: FIRST 100000000
..are you sure with the amount of rows in the 2nd QVD?
ok, this will not resolve your problem, but I think it is worth to be posted:
Meanwhile i was a bit testing and discoverd some funny things:
When concatenating a second qvd to a just loaded first one, the First-Statement is ignored. "First 1" should add the very first record but QV added all rows from the second qvd. "First 1000" same.
Then I tried different things and considered that after adding a Where - Clause the First-Statement worked fine. Even if the Where was a "Where 1=1".
Loading only one qvd, "First" works also fine.
HtH
Roland
P.s: using 11.20 SR3
Hi Ralf,
es sind doch immer wieder die selben, gelle !
Gruß
Roland
P.S:
Jetzt aber ab zum Kaffee.
Interesting. Another phenomena.. Which QlikView version is affected?
Grüße zurück..