Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Pavel Stehule
Тема Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression
Дата
Msg-id CAFj8pRA9_HCG2KksSPqX-17h51tRa0M5AkBdJuOXnwhQ3REDTA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers


čt 19. 3. 2020 v 10:47 odesílatel Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> napsal:
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 broken after 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?

There was a problem with plpgsql_check after I applied this patch. It crashed differently on own regress tests.

But I cannot to reproduce this issue now. Probably there was more issues than one on my build environment.

So my questions and notes about a change of MemoryContext after patching are messy. Sorry for noise.

Regards

Pavel

 

--
Thank you,
Amit

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Justin Pryzby
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: explain HashAggregate to report bucket and memory stats
Следующее
От: Amit Kapila
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: error context for vacuum to include block number