| From: | Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neimar Sierota <neimarsmo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Mauricio Martini <martini(dot)mauricio(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL uses huge amount of memory |
| Date: | 2023-03-08 16:13:13 |
| Message-ID: | 8A29F022-669D-4C40-B5D3-A2D1D0D727C2@elevated-dev.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Could it be a difference in parallel queries? (I don't remember when those were added.) Certainly, a union is an example of something that will clearly get multiple workers.
--
Scott Ribe
scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottribe/
> On Mar 8, 2023, at 6:29 AM, Neimar Sierota <neimarsmo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> I did a test as you mentioned and in postgresql version 11 I didn't observe any change in memory consumption while the query is executed. With version 14, running the same query, it is possible to observe a considerable increase in memory usage during execution.
> Could it be a bug in postgresql's memory management?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fernando Hevia | 2023-03-08 16:48:59 | Re: PostgreSQL uses huge amount of memory |
| Previous Message | Neimar Sierota | 2023-03-08 13:29:12 | Re: PostgreSQL uses huge amount of memory |