Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Simon Riggs
Тема Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg
Дата
Msg-id CA+U5nMLch1R=Panty4nEUw5rw5-gS-kUx3Q_fbNon=zGcNHy1g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Ответы Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg  (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 16 October 2014 02:26, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:

> The inheritance is awkward anyway, though. If you create a tracked
> context as a child of an already-tracked context, allocations in the
> newer one won't count against the original. I don't see a way around
> that without introducing even more performance problems.

This seems to have reached impasse, which is a shame. Let me throw out
a few questions to see if that might help.

Do I understand correctly that we are trying to account for exact
memory usage at palloc/pfree time? Why??

Surely we just want to keep track of the big chunks? Does this need to
be exact? How exact does it need to be?

Or alternatively, can't we just sample the allocations to reduce the overhead?

Are there some assumptions we can make about micro-contexts never
needing to be tracked at all? Jeff seems not too bothered by
inheritance, whereas Tomas thinks its essential. Perhaps there is a
middle ground, depending upon the role of the context?

-- Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Patch to support SEMI and ANTI join removal
Следующее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Log notice that checkpoint is to be written on shutdown