Re: Memory consumed by child SpecialJoinInfo in partitionwise join planning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Langote
Subject Re: Memory consumed by child SpecialJoinInfo in partitionwise join planning
Date
Msg-id CA+HiwqHJ+Su3XwT-zeBvyO+8=4ms19oZNBPtqb8P5a-z-fH3fw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Memory consumed by child SpecialJoinInfo in partitionwise join planning  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Memory consumed by child SpecialJoinInfo in partitionwise join planning
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 10:24 PM Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 5:24 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just one comment on 0003:
> >
> > +   /*
> > +    * Dummy SpecialJoinInfos do not have any translated fields and hence have
> > +    * nothing to free.
> > +    */
> > +   if (child_sjinfo->jointype == JOIN_INNER)
> > +       return;
> >
> > Should this instead be Assert(child_sjinfo->jointype != JOIN_INNER)?
>
> try_partitionwise_join() calls free_child_sjinfo_members()
> unconditionally i.e. it will be called even SpecialJoinInfos of INNER
> join. Above condition filters those out early. In fact if we convert
> into an Assert, in a production build the rest of the code will free
> Relids which are referenced somewhere else causing dangling pointers.

You're right.  I hadn't realized that the parent SpecialJoinInfo
passed to try_partitionwise_join() might itself be a dummy.  I guess I
should've read the whole thing before commenting.


--
Thanks, Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: LLVM 16 (opaque pointers)
Next
From: Ryoga Yoshida
Date:
Subject: Bug fix in vacuumdb --buffer-usage-limit xxx -Z