Re: logical decoding : exceeded maxAllocatedDescs for .spill files - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: logical decoding : exceeded maxAllocatedDescs for .spill files
Date
Msg-id 18117.1578616812@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logical decoding : exceeded maxAllocatedDescs for .spill files  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: logical decoding : exceeded maxAllocatedDescs for .spill files  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Re: logical decoding : exceeded maxAllocatedDescs for .spill files  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
>           ReorderBuffer: 223302560 total in 26995 blocks; 7056 free (3 chunks); 223295504 used

> The test case is only inserting 50K fairly-short rows, so this seems
> like an unreasonable amount of memory to be consuming for that; and
> even if you think it's reasonable, it clearly isn't going to scale
> to large production transactions.

> Now, the good news is that v11 and later get through
> 006_logical_decoding.pl just fine under the same restriction.
> So we did something in v11 to fix this excessive memory consumption.
> However, unless we're willing to back-port whatever that was, this
> test case is clearly consuming excessive resources for the v10 branch.

I dug around a little in the git history for backend/replication/logical/,
and while I find several commit messages mentioning memory leaks and
faulty spill logic, they all claim to have been back-patched as far
as 9.4.

It seems reasonably likely to me that this result is telling us about
an actual bug, ie, faulty back-patching of one or more of those fixes
into v10 and perhaps earlier branches.

I don't know this code well enough to take point on looking for the
problem, though.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench - use pg logging capabilities
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench - use pg logging capabilities