Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs

At Tue, 8 Dec 2020 01:16:00 +0900, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> Hi Alvaro,
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 23:48 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
>
> > On 2020-Dec-07, Amit Langote wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:05 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > > <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > > > Also, the comment that was in RI_ConstraintInfo now appears in
> > > > > RI_ConstraintParam, and the new struct (RI_ConstraintInfo) is now
> > > > > undocumented. What is the relationship between those two structs? I
> > > > > see that they have pointers to each other, but I think the
> > relationship
> > > > > should be documented more clearly.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure the footprint of this patch worth doing but here is a bit
> > > > more polished version.
> > >
> > > I noticed that the foreign_key test fails and it may have to do with
> > > the fact that a partition's param info remains attached to the
> > > parent's RI_ConstraintInfo even after it's detached from the parent
> > > table using DETACH PARTITION.
> >
> > I think this bit about splitting the struct is a distraction. Let's get
> > a patch that solves the bug first, and then we can discuss what further
> > refinements we want to do. I think we should get your patch in
> > CA+HiwqEOrfN9b=f3sDmySPGc4gO-L_VMFHXLLxVmmdP34e64+w(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com
> > committed (which I have not read yet.) Do you agree with this plan?
>
>
> Yeah, I agree.

Or https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+HiwqGrr2YOO6voBM6m_OAc9w-WMxe1gOuQ-UyDPin6zJtyZw@mail.gmail.com ?

+1 from me to either one.

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center