Re: Optimize planner memory consumption for huge arrays
Alena Rybakina <lena.ribackina@yandex.ru>
From: Alena Rybakina <lena.ribackina@yandex.ru>
To: Andrei Lepikhov <a.lepikhov@postgrespro.ru>, Tom Lane
<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Евгений Бредня <e.brednya@postgrespro.ru>
Date: 2024-02-22T18:50:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
Hi! On 20.02.2024 07:41, Andrei Lepikhov wrote: > On 20/2/2024 04:51, Tom Lane wrote: >> Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> writes: >>> On 2/19/24 16:45, Tom Lane wrote: >>>> Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> writes: >>>>> For example, I don't think we expect selectivity functions to >>>>> allocate >>>>> long-lived objects, right? So maybe we could run them in a dedicated >>>>> memory context, and reset it aggressively (after each call). >> Here's a quick and probably-incomplete implementation of that idea. >> I've not tried to study its effects on memory consumption, just made >> sure it passes check-world. > Thanks for the sketch. The trick with the planner_tmp_cxt_depth > especially looks interesting. > I think we should design small memory contexts - one per scalable > direction of memory utilization, like selectivity or partitioning > (appending ?). > My coding experience shows that short-lived GEQO memory context forces > people to learn on Postgres internals more precisely :). > I think there was a problem in your patch when you freed up the memory of a variable in the eqsel_internal function, because we have a case where the variable was deleted by reference in the eval_const_expressions_mutator function (it is only for T_SubPlan and T_AlternativeSubPlan type of nodes. This query just causes an error in your case: create table a (id bigint, c1 bigint, primary key(id)); create table b (a_id bigint, b_id bigint, b2 bigint, primary key(a_id, b_id)); explain select id from a, b where id = a_id and b2 = (select min(b2) from b where id = a_id); drop table a; drop table b; We can return a copy of the variable or not release the memory of this variable. I attached two patch: the first one is removing your memory cleanup and another one returns the copy of variable. The author of the corrections is not only me, but also Daniil Anisimov. -- Regards, Alena Rybakina Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company