| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | ben(at)lantern(dot)is, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #16112: large, unexpected memory consumption |
| Date: | 2019-11-13 22:53:28 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1yXNf_=dFtOkp=M2kXs1RHPgUddxAv3qDfyAfOEOz=YnA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 9:50 AM Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> Yeah, I can reproduce this pretty easily. It seems like a memory leak in
> ExecMakeTableFunctionResult. a9c35cf85ca reworked FunctionCallInfo to be
> variable-length, but it gets allocated in ExecutorState context directly
> and so until the end of the query.
>
I find the leak was introduced much earlier than that, in:
commit 763f2edd92095b1ca2f4476da073a28505c13820
Author: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Date: Thu Nov 15 14:26:14 2018 -0800
Rejigger materializing and fetching a HeapTuple from a slot.
I have no idea if this info is useful to informing the best solution,
though.
You patch applied to REL_12_STABLE does fix it for me.
> The attached trivial patch fixes that by adding a pfree() at the end of
> the function. I wonder if we have the same issue elsewhere ...
>
>
Is there an easy way to assess if the "make check" regression tests are
taking more memory than they used to?
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2019-11-13 23:04:07 | Re: BUG #16112: large, unexpected memory consumption |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-11-13 20:56:11 | Re: Unexpected "cache lookup failed for collation 0" failure |