Re: [HACKERS] Everything leaks; How it mm suppose to work?
David Gould <dg@illustra.com>
From: dg@illustra.com (David Gould)
To: lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu (Thomas G. Lockhart)
Cc: mgittens@gits.nl, dz@cs.unitn.it, hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 1998-04-09T18:34:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Thomas G. Lockhart replies to Maurice: > > >Does it make sense to have a 'row' context which is released just > > >before starting with a new tuple ? The total number or free is the > > >same but they are distributed over the query and unused memory should > > >not accumulate. > > >I have seen backends growing to 40-60MB with queries which scan a > > >very large number of rows. > > I think this would be appropiate. > > It seems that the CPU overhead on all queries would increase trying to > deallocate/reuse memory during the query. There are lots of places in > the backend where memory is palloc'd and then left lying around after > use; I had assumed it was sort-of-intentional to avoid having extra > cleanup overhead during a query. This is exactly right. Destroying a memory context in the current implementationis a very high overhead operation. Doing it once per row would be a performance disaster. -dg David Gould dg@illustra.com 510.628.3783 or 510.305.9468 Informix Software (No, really) 300 Lakeside Drive Oakland, CA 94612 - Linux. Not because it is free. Because it is better.