Re: Bug? ExecChooseHashTableSize() got assertion failed with crazy number of rows - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Bug? ExecChooseHashTableSize() got assertion failed with crazy number of rows
Date
Msg-id CAKJS1f_MYscg1HPxwN27TTkN_b2c2OgW0phEvQqPiFQz_eEOvg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bug? ExecChooseHashTableSize() got assertion failed with crazy number of rows  (Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>)
Responses Re: Bug? ExecChooseHashTableSize() got assertion failed with crazy number of rows
Re: Bug? ExecChooseHashTableSize() got assertion failed with crazy number of rows
List pgsql-hackers
On 19 August 2015 at 08:54, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> wrote:
Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote:

>         long        lbuckets;

>         lbuckets = 1 << my_log2(hash_table_bytes / bucket_size);

>     Assert(nbuckets > 0);

> In my case, the hash_table_bytes was 101017630802, and bucket_size was 48.
> So, my_log2(hash_table_bytes / bucket_size) = 31, then lbuckets will have
> negative number because both "1" and my_log2() is int32.
> So, Min(lbuckets, max_pointers) chooses 0x80000000, then it was set on
> the nbuckets and triggers the Assert().

> Attached patch fixes the problem.

So you changed the literal of 1 to 1U, but doesn't that just double
the threshold for failure?  Wouldn't 1L (to match the definition of
lbuckets) be better?


I agree, but I can only imagine this is happening because the maximum setting of work_mem has been modified with the code you're running.

hash_tables_bytes is set based on work_mem

hash_table_bytes = work_mem * 1024L;

The size of your hash table is 101017630802 bytes, which is:

david=# select pg_size_pretty(101017630802);
 pg_size_pretty
----------------
 94 GB
(1 row)

david=# set work_mem = '94GB';
ERROR:  98566144 is outside the valid range for parameter "work_mem" (64 .. 2097151)

So I think the only way the following could cause an error, is if bucket_size was 1, which it can't be.

lbuckets = 1 << my_log2(hash_table_bytes / bucket_size);

I think one day soon we'll need to allow larger work_mem sizes, but I think there's lots more to do than this change.

Regards

David Rowley

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

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kouhei Kaigai
Date:
Subject: Re: Bug? ExecChooseHashTableSize() got assertion failed with crazy number of rows
Next
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench - allow backslash-continuations in custom scripts