Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg
Date
Msg-id 20141117184621.GM27042@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg  (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
Responses Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg  (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2014-11-17 19:42:25 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 17.11.2014 18:04, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 2014-11-16 23:31:51 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> >> *** a/src/include/nodes/memnodes.h
> >> --- b/src/include/nodes/memnodes.h
> >> ***************
> >> *** 60,65 **** typedef struct MemoryContextData
> >> --- 60,66 ----
> >>       MemoryContext nextchild;    /* next child of same parent */
> >>       char       *name;            /* context name (just for debugging) */
> >>       bool        isReset;        /* T = no space alloced since last reset */
> >> +     uint64        mem_allocated;    /* track memory allocated for this context */
> >>   #ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING
> >>       bool        allowInCritSection;    /* allow palloc in critical section */
> >>   #endif
> > 
> > That's quite possibly one culprit for the slowdown. Right now one 
> > AllocSetContext struct fits precisely into three cachelines. After
> > your change it doesn't anymore.
> 
> I'm no PPC64 expert, but I thought the cache lines are 128 B on that
> platform, since at least Power6?

Hm, might be true.

> Also, if I'm counting right, the MemoryContextData structure is 56B
> without the 'mem_allocated' field (and without the allowInCritSection),
> and 64B with it (at that particular place). sizeof() seems to confirm
> that. (But I'm on x86, so maybe the alignment on PPC64 is different?).

The MemoryContextData struct is embedded into AllocSetContext.

> > Consider not counting memory in bytes but blocks and adding it
> > directly after the NodeTag. That'd leave the size the same as right
> > now.
> 
> I suppose you mean "kbytes", because the block size is not fixed.

Some coarser size than bytes. Don't really care about the granularity.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: using custom scan nodes to prototype parallel sequential scan