Re: Out of Memory errors are frustrating as heck! - Mailing list pgsql-performance
From | Gunther |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Out of Memory errors are frustrating as heck! |
Date | |
Msg-id | f6d4f3be-44f8-0c45-de0d-e68caef9bb60@gusw.net Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Out of Memory errors are frustrating as heck! (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Out of Memory errors are frustrating as heck!
|
List | pgsql-performance |
On 4/20/2019 21:14, Tomas Vondra wrote:
Maybe. But before wasting any more time on the memory leak investigation,
I suggest you first try the patch moving the BufFile allocations to a
separate context. That'll either confirm or disprove the theory.
OK, fair enough. So, first patch 0001-* applied, recompiled and
2019-04-21 04:08:04.364 UTC [11304] LOG: server process (PID 11313) was terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault 2019-04-21 04:08:04.364 UTC [11304] DETAIL: Failed process was running: explain analyze select * from reports.v_BusinessOperation; 2019-04-21 04:08:04.364 UTC [11304] LOG: terminating any other active server processes 2019-04-21 04:08:04.368 UTC [11319] FATAL: the database system is in recovery mode 2019-04-21 04:08:04.368 UTC [11315] WARNING: terminating connection because of crash of another server process
SIGSEGV ... and with the core dump that I have I can tell you where:
Core was generated by `postgres: postgres integrator'. Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. #0 0x00000000009f300c in palloc (size=8272) at mcxt.c:936 936 context->isReset = false; (gdb) bt #0 0x00000000009f300c in palloc (size=8272) at mcxt.c:936 #1 0x000000000082b068 in makeBufFileCommon (nfiles=1) at buffile.c:116 #2 0x000000000082b0f8 in makeBufFile (firstfile=73) at buffile.c:138 #3 0x000000000082b283 in BufFileCreateTemp (interXact=false) at buffile.c:201 #4 0x00000000006bdc15 in ExecHashJoinSaveTuple (tuple=0x1c5a468, hashvalue=3834163156, fileptr=0x18a3730) at nodeHashjoin.c:1227 #5 0x00000000006b9568 in ExecHashTableInsert (hashtable=0x188fb88, slot=0x1877a18, hashvalue=3834163156) at nodeHash.c:1701 #6 0x00000000006b6c39 in MultiExecPrivateHash (node=0x1862168) at nodeHash.c:186 #7 0x00000000006b6aec in MultiExecHash (node=0x1862168) at nodeHash.c:114 #8 0x00000000006a19cc in MultiExecProcNode (node=0x1862168) at execProcnode.c:501 #9 0x00000000006bc5d2 in ExecHashJoinImpl (pstate=0x17b90e0, parallel=false) at nodeHashjoin.c:290 ... (gdb) info frame Stack level 0, frame at 0x7fffd5d4dc80:rip = 0x9f300c in palloc (mcxt.c:936); saved rip = 0x82b068called by frame at 0x7fffd5d4dcb0source language c.Arglist at 0x7fffd5d4dc70, args: size=8272Locals at 0x7fffd5d4dc70, Previous frame's sp is 0x7fffd5d4dc80Saved registers: rbx at 0x7fffd5d4dc60, rbp at 0x7fffd5d4dc70, r12 at 0x7fffd5d4dc68, rip at 0x7fffd5d4dc78and I have confirmed that this is while working the main T_HashJoin with jointype JOIN_RIGHT.
So now I am assuming that perhaps you want both of these patches applied. So applied it, and retried and boom, same thing same place.
turns out the MemoryContext is NULL:
(gdb) p context $1 = (MemoryContext) 0x0
all patches applied cleanly (with the -p1 option). I see no .rej file, but also no .orig file, not sure why that version of patch didn't create them. But I paid attention and know that there was no error.
-Gunther
pgsql-performance by date: