From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Matt Magoffin" <postgresql(dot)org(at)msqr(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Memory use in 8.3 plpgsql with heavy use of xpath() |
Date: | 2008-07-03 00:10:32 |
Message-ID: | 18771.1215043832@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Matt Magoffin" <postgresql(dot)org(at)msqr(dot)us> writes:
> Later, I added a large set of plpgsql trigger functions that operate on
> that new xml column data, using the xpath() function to extract bits of
> XML and populate them into normal tables. The server has been running in
> this fashion for many months now, and there is a noticeable difference in
> how Postgres is using memory now, in that over time it's non-shared memory
> use is climbing higher and higher. Right now I'm tracking this from data
> captured by Munin on the system. The memory creep is very slight, but over
> many months is easy to discern.
Looking back, I'm not sure that what we just found explains that part
of your original report.
> If I run some of these plpgsql functions using a lot of xpath() calls on
> large sets of data, huge amounts of memory are consumed (gigabytes) and
> the memory seems to accumulate until the transaction the functions are
> running in completes.
This part seems to match the bug though --- the leak is approximately
the same size as all the text returned by xpath() within the current
transaction.
So there may be a second issue remaining to be found. Can you put
together a test case for the long-term small leak?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-03 00:35:22 | Re: changing text search treatment of puncutation |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-03 00:06:31 | Re: Memory use in 8.3 plpgsql with heavy use of xpath() |