From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Roman Cervenak <roman(at)cervenak(dot)info> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Memory leak (possibly connected to postgis) leading to server crash |
Date: | 2019-12-17 12:50:35 |
Message-ID: | 20191217125035.wdplskovliz7d5lh@development |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:51:27PM +0100, Roman Cervenak wrote:
>Hey guys,
>I have reproducer for you.
>
>Luckily, the issue is not specific for our data, and can be demonstrated
>also on OpenStreepMap data. I have imported OSM planet with Imposm, which
>creates tables with PostGIS geometry columns.
>I have used roads for linestring testing and landuse for polygon testing,
>with queries combining several geometric operations (similar to my
>production workload).
>
>The linesting test with 7 concurrent workers increases memory consumption
>by about 6 GB per hour on my environment.
>
>If you don't have OSM database with geometries, I have dumped the roads
>table (about 25GB download):
>https://sygicpublic.blob.core.windows.net/postgres-bug-data/osm_road.sql.gzip
>Here is the tool running queries in parallel workers, written in .NET Core
>(just fill in database connection info in Program.cs, build and run):
>https://github.com/rouen-sk/PostgisMemoryLeakDemoCore
>
>Let me know if I can help further.
>
I'll try reproducing it, but I don't have any environment to run c#
stuff. Is it possible to reproduce a single query reproducing the issue,
with fixed parameters? Or is the randomization necessary?
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Roman Cervenak | 2019-12-17 13:20:41 | Re: Memory leak (possibly connected to postgis) leading to server crash |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-12-17 12:07:51 | Re: Planning time is high in Postgres 11.5 Compared with Postgres 10.11 |