Re: Memory Accounting v11 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Memory Accounting v11
Date
Msg-id CANP8+jL_y87LQ2oqGrdNn72UCyJmSqjNb1oBbRAk0yzxEAWf0g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Memory Accounting v11  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Memory Accounting v11
List pgsql-hackers
On 14 June 2015 at 23:51, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
 
The current state, where HashAgg just blows up the memory, is just not
reasonable, and we need to track the memory to fix that problem.

Meh. HashAgg could track its memory usage without loading the entire
system with a penalty.

+1 to a solution like that, although I don't think that's doable without digging the info from memory contexts somehow.

Jeff is right, we desperately need a solution and this is the place to start.

Tom's concern remains valid: we must not load the entire system with a penalty.


The only questions I have are:

* If the memory allocations adapt to the usage pattern, then we expect to see few memory chunk allocations. Why are we expecting "the entire system" to experience a penalty?

* If we do not manage our resources, how are we certain this does not induce a penalty? Not tracking memory could be worse than tracking it.

--
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: raw output from copy
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: psql tabcomplete - minor bugfix - tabcomplete for SET ROLE TO xxx