From: | RekGRpth <rekgrpth(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #16974: memory leak |
Date: | 2021-04-21 09:05:11 |
Message-ID: | CAPgh2mJdrPZFQF-+WyVn0tVgCO1rwkov_T1xTPosuQomtwyzXA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Yes,
The backend's "SHR" memory size increase from ~20Mb on startup to
~150Mb by one day (with inserts and updates into table)
вт, 20 апр. 2021 г. в 19:32, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>
> PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > ...
> > 7) in opened psql execute above two files periodically
> > \i sql/update.sql
> > \i sql/timeout.sql
> > 8) the memory (using by corresponded postgres backend) is increasing
> > constantly
>
> I tried this, and I don't see any evidence of a leak, not even
> after I inserted some data into "task" so that the queries were
> actually doing something.
>
> The backend's "SHR" memory size will increase for awhile, but
> that's just evidence of it touching more and more of the shared
> buffer pool over time. The total virtual memory size ("VIRT"
> column in top) is rock-solid steady, so there's no actual
> accumulation of leaked memory.
>
> Perhaps there's an issue here somewhere, but if so, you haven't
> given a sufficient description of how to reproduce it.
>
> regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-04-21 09:40:11 | Re: postgres has no spinlock support on riscv rv64imafdc |
Previous Message | Piotr F. | 2021-04-21 08:31:20 | Re: BUG #16973: Backward compatibility: pg_restore: [archiver] unsupported version (1.14) in file header |