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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg
Date
Msg-id 27159.1408212048@sss.pgh.pa.us
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
List pgsql-hackers
Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz> writes:
> I believe this should check parent->track_mem, just like
> update_allocation, because this way it walks all the parent context up
> to the TopMemoryContext.

TBH, I don't think this "opt-in tracking" business has been thought
through even a little bit; for example, what happens if there is a
declared-to-not-track context in between levels that are declared
to track?  And it certainly has not been proven that the extra
complexity actually saves cycles rather than the reverse.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: replication commands and log_statements
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg