From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Memory leak in WAL sender with pgoutput (v10~) |
Date: | 2024-12-10 05:54:38 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+1p4MsJZcP75amWwUpSnHMWUcVBRERHgFwbr6hj2dA3A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 8:54 AM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 04:56, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 03:36:15PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > It couldn't solve the problem completely even in back-branches. The
> > > SQL API case I mentioned and tested by Hou-San in the email [1] won't
> > > be solved.
> > >
> > > [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OS0PR01MB57166A4DA0ABBB94F2FBB28694362%40OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com
> >
> > Yeah, exactly (wanted to reply exactly that yesterday but lacked time,
> > thanks!).
>
> Yes, that makes sense. How about something like the attached patch.
>
- oldctx = MemoryContextSwitchTo(CacheMemoryContext);
- if (data->publications)
- {
- list_free_deep(data->publications);
- data->publications = NIL;
- }
+ static MemoryContext pubctx = NULL;
+
+ if (pubctx == NULL)
+ pubctx = AllocSetContextCreate(CacheMemoryContext,
+ "logical replication publication list context",
+ ALLOCSET_SMALL_SIZES);
+ else
+ MemoryContextReset(pubctx);
+
+ oldctx = MemoryContextSwitchTo(pubctx);
Considering the SQL API case, why is it okay to allocate this context
under CacheMemoryContext?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2024-12-10 06:18:44 | Re: Skip collecting decoded changes of already-aborted transactions |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-12-10 05:49:47 | Re: Skip collecting decoded changes of already-aborted transactions |