Thread
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Fix intra-query memory leak when a SRF returns zero rows.
- 237f8765dfd9 17.0 landed
- d8d7f282fd1d 12.17 landed
- b7684473d74a 13.13 landed
- 7ab6971c657f 11.22 landed
- 5d7515d7d116 14.10 landed
- 592cb11fbee0 15.5 landed
- 07494a0df9a6 16.1 landed
-
Adjust parallel_schedule with event triggers on authenticated login
- 83510534d5f3 17.0 cited
-
BUG #18172: High memory usage in tSRF function context
PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> — 2023-10-27T11:02:14Z
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 18172 Logged by: Sergei Kornilov Email address: sk@zsrv.org PostgreSQL version: Unsupported/Unknown Operating system: various Linux Description: Hello While researching several cases of OOM, I discovered an atypically high memory consumption in this case: /* * test data looks like {"pay": [{"id": 1, "test": 1}], "name": "foo1"} * about 1,3GiB total */ create table test (id serial, data jsonb); insert into test (data) select jsonb_build_object('name', 'foo'||i, 'pay', jsonb_build_array(jsonb_build_object('id', i, 'test', i % 10))) from generate_series(1,1e7,1) as i; Using gdb I called MemoryContextStats(TopPortalContext) on break point standard_ExecutorEnd statement: select distinct (jsonb_array_elements(data->'pay2')->>'test') from test; TopPortalContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7680 free (0 chunks); 512 used PortalContext: 1024 total in 1 blocks; 616 free (0 chunks); 408 used: <unnamed> ExecutorState: 16384 total in 2 blocks; 1760 free (5 chunks); 14624 used HashAgg meta context: 24576 total in 2 blocks; 13880 free (2 chunks); 10696 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used tSRF function arguments: 1442840576 total in 182 blocks; 2833096 free (356 chunks); 1440007480 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used Grand total: 1442956288 bytes in 196 blocks; 2920648 free (363 chunks); 1440035640 used statement: select distinct (jsonb_array_elements(data->'pay2')->>'test') from test where data ? 'pay2'; TopPortalContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7680 free (0 chunks); 512 used PortalContext: 1024 total in 1 blocks; 616 free (0 chunks); 408 used: <unnamed> ExecutorState: 32768 total in 3 blocks; 16680 free (6 chunks); 16088 used HashAgg meta context: 57408 total in 2 blocks; 5744 free (0 chunks); 51664 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used tSRF function arguments: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used Grand total: 173120 bytes in 16 blocks; 102288 free (6 chunks); 70832 used statement: select distinct (jsonb_array_elements(data->'pay')->>'test') from test; TopPortalContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7680 free (0 chunks); 512 used PortalContext: 1024 total in 1 blocks; 616 free (0 chunks); 408 used: <unnamed> ExecutorState: 32768 total in 3 blocks; 17912 free (10 chunks); 14856 used HashAgg meta context: 1581120 total in 2 blocks; 5744 free (0 chunks); 1575376 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used tSRF function arguments: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7472 free (0 chunks); 720 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used ExprContext: 8192 total in 1 blocks; 7952 free (0 chunks); 240 used Grand total: 1696832 bytes in 16 blocks; 103040 free (10 chunks); 1593792 used The first query consumes much more memory; note that it refers to a non-existent json key. Querying for a key that exists in JSON or checking for the existence of a key in where clause corrects memory consumption. But, unfortunately, data analysts write the query exactly like the first statement, not like the second statement. Queries, of course, are corrected later, but maybe it is possible to improve memory consumption for this case? MemoryContextStats above are from my local 17devel (83510534d5f3f116efa035639b9b62b8c6c4df34 commit), occurs for all supported versions. regards, Sergei -
Re: BUG #18172: High memory usage in tSRF function context
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2023-10-28T03:19:02Z
PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes: > While researching several cases of OOM, I discovered an atypically high > memory consumption in this case: > ... > The first query consumes much more memory; note that it refers to a > non-existent json key. Querying for a key that exists in JSON or checking > for the existence of a key in where clause corrects memory consumption. Thanks for the report! It seems that ExecProjectSet neglected to think hard about what happens when the SRF returns zero rows, so it leaks whatever memory the SRF expression might have leaked. The attached fixes it for me. regards, tom lane
-
Re:BUG #18172: High memory usage in tSRF function context
Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org> — 2023-10-28T07:56:15Z
Hi Thank you! The patch works for me too. regards, Sergei
-
Re: BUG #18172: High memory usage in tSRF function context
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2023-10-28T18:15:08Z
Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org> writes: > Thank you! The patch works for me too. Thanks for testing! I looked at ExecProjectSet a second time and realized that I probably still hadn't thought hard enough, because it's also responsible for doing ResetExprContext(econtext) and that wasn't happening either when looping around after the SRF returns no rows. So if the SRF itself leaks some memory in its CurrentMemoryContext and then returns nothing, we can see bloat in that context. I failed to produce such a behavior with jsonb_array_elements, but after trying some other things I found a test case that still leaked even with the initial patch: create table zed as select repeat('xyzzy', 10000) as f1, repeat('g', 10000) as flags from generate_series(1,100000); select regexp_matches(f1, 'q', flags) from zed; The leak here stems from regexp_matches detoasting its flags argument in the CurrentMemoryContext. A big flags argument is surely not real-world usage, but perhaps there are other cases that are more likely to happen. The fix of course is just to make sure we also do ResetExprContext when looping around. Applied to all branches. regards, tom lane -
Re:BUG #18172: High memory usage in tSRF function context
Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org> — 2023-10-28T18:47:40Z
Great! Thanks! regards, Sergei