Re: possible memory leak with SRFs

> Patch attached with this mail.
>

The previous patch was WIP. Please take a look at this one instead. I
hope this handles the cases where results are not just base datums but
palloc'ed datums like string types too.

Regards,
Nikhils

> The SRF has its own long-lived "SRF multi-call context" anyways. And
> AIUI, SRFs return tuples one-by-one or do we materialize the same into
> a tuplestore in some cases?
>
> Regards,
> Nikhils
>
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Nikhil Sontakke
> <nikhil.sontakke@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I saw this behavior with latest GIT head:
>>
>> create table xlarge(val numeric(19,0));
>> insert into xlarge values(generate_series(1,5));
>>
>> The above generate series will return an int8 which will then be
>> casted to numeric (via int8_to_numericvar) before being inserted into
>> the table. I observed that the ExprContext memory associated with
>> econtext->ecxt_per_tuple_memory is slowly bloating up till the end of
>> the insert operation.
>>
>> This becomes significant the moment we try to insert a significant
>> number of entries using this SRF. I can see the memory being consumed
>> by the PG backend slowly grow to a large percentage.
>>
>> I see that the executor (take ExecResult as an example) does not reset
>> the expression context early if an SRF is churning out tuples. What
>> could be a good way to fix this?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nikhils
>> --
>> http://www.enterprisedb.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.enterprisedb.com
>



-- 
http://www.enterprisedb.com