Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: RMAN "Memory fault"

Re: RMAN "Memory fault"

From: Tim Gorman <>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:31:46 -0600
Message-ID: <>

Not sure what platform you're on, but it sounds to me like a 64-bit shared library being referenced by a 32-bit executable. Or vice versa...

Have you used "ldd $ORACLE_HOME/bin/rman" and seen it come back clean without error messages? Have you used the UNIX command "file <xxx>" where "<xxx>" is the filename of the RMAN executable as well as each of the shared libraries displays by the "ldd" command, and had the output from the "file" come back consistent for the type of application that "$ORACLE_HOME/bin/rman"?

I'm thinking that perhaps LD_LIBRARY_PATH or SHLIB_PATH (or whatever is appropriate for your platform) is pointing to the wrong shared libraries...

Just a guess....

Allen, Brandon wrote:
> It looks to me like maybe the OS admins have something setup to
> automatically kill processes that exceed a certain memory or CPU usage
> threshold - maybe check with your Unix admin if you haven't already?
> I've had similar issues in the past where processes were automatically
> killed for using too much CPU.
> Regards,
> Brandon
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [] On Behalf Of Herring Dave -
> dherri
> I've got a regular job to delete obsolete pieces from our RMAN catalog,
> which now is failing with "Memory fault".
> I even truss'ed the session and it ends with:
> ...
> Received signal #11, SIGSEGV [default]
> siginfo: SIGSEGV SEGV_MAPERR addr=0x0000000000000058
> Err#11 Error 11
> occurred.
> *** process killed ***
> Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.
> --

Received on Mon Oct 29 2007 - 14:31:46 CDT

Original text of this message