Re: Memory Accounting v11 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Memory Accounting v11
Date
Msg-id 1436945272.4369.204.camel@jeff-desktop
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Memory Accounting v11  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Memory Accounting v11  (Atri Sharma <atri.jiit@gmail.com>)
Re: Memory Accounting v11  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 16:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> tuplesort.c does its own accounting, and TBH that seems like the right
> thing to do here, too.  The difficulty is, I think, that some
> transition functions use an internal data type for the transition
> state, which might not be a single palloc'd chunk.  But since we can't
> spill those aggregates to disk *anyway*, that doesn't really matter.

So would it be acceptable to just ignore the memory consumed by
"internal", or come up with some heuristic?

Regards,Jeff Davis





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Could be improved point of UPSERT
Next
From: Atri Sharma
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory Accounting v11