On 2019-Sep-26, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Attached is an updated patch series, rebased on current master. It does
> fix one memory accounting bug in ReorderBufferToastReplace (the code was
> not properly updating the amount of memory).
Cool.
Can we aim to get 0001 pushed during this commitfest, or is that a lost
cause?
The large new comment in reorderbuffer.c says that a transaction might
get spilled *or streamed*, but surely that second thing is not correct,
since before the subsequent patches it's not possible to stream
transactions that have not yet finished?
How certain are you about the approach to measure memory used by a
reorderbuffer transaction ... does it not cause a measurable performance
drop? I wonder if it would make more sense to use a separate contexts
per transaction and use context-level accounting (per the patch Jeff
Davis posted elsewhere for hash joins ... though I see now that that
only works fot aset.c, not other memcxt implementations), or something
like that.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
