From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Curing plpgsql's memory leaks for statement-lifespan values |
Date: | 2016-08-18 21:44:57 |
Message-ID: | d469bd35-35c8-f68a-540f-c542ce601a54@BlueTreble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 7/25/16 1:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> There's a glibc-dependent hack in aset.c that reports any
> plpgsql-driven palloc or pfree against a context named "SPI Proc", as
> well as changes in pl_comp.c so that transient junk created during initial
> parsing of a plpgsql function body doesn't end up in the SPI Proc context.
> (I did that just to cut the amount of noise I had to chase down. I suppose
> in large functions it might be worth adopting such a change so that that
> junk can be released immediately after parsing; but I suspect for most
> functions it'd just be an extra context without much gain.)
Some folks do create very large plpgsql functions, so if there's a handy
way to estimate the size of the function (pg_proc.prosrc's varlena size
perhaps) then it might be worth doing that for quite large functions.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-18 22:01:14 | Re: [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-08-18 21:38:12 | Re: [WIP] [B-Tree] Keep indexes sorted by heap physical location |