Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Langote
Тема Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression
Дата
Msg-id CA+HiwqHB3WgZ+EmrqsFApLdS3rQMiyMQoMYskSStOLJ2pq_PCQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi Pavel,

Sorry it took me a while to look at this.

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 4:28 AM Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
> po 24. 2. 2020 v 18:56 odesílatel Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> napsal:
>> But I found one issue - I don't know if this issue is related to your patch or plpgsql_check.
>>
>> plpgsql_check try to clean after it was executed - it cleans all plans. But some pointers on simple expressions are
brokenafter catched exceptions. 
>>
>> expr->plan = 0x80. Is interesting, so other fields of this expressions are correct.
>
> I am not sure, but after patching the SPI_prepare_params the current memory context is some short memory context.
>
> Can SPI_prepare_params change current memory context? It did before. But after patching different memory context is
active.

I haven't been able to see the behavior you reported.  Could you let
me know what unexpected memory context you see in the problematic
case?

--
Thank you,
Amit



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Internal key management system
Следующее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: error context for vacuum to include block number