pg.ddx.io  pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Craig Milhiser <craig@milhiser.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Reference to - BUG #18349: ERROR: invalid DSA memory alloc request size 1811939328, CONTEXT: parallel worker
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 06:59:02 +0700
Message-ID: <14f5f867-2d85-4faa-8bd2-76dfeda91b37@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKG+jd5hiVxiRidLji1EAyKnApN33mNdwpkuOR3NqkfEN0g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+wnhO1OfgXbmXgC4fv_uu=OxcDQuHvfoQ4k0DFeB0Qqd-X-rQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+wnhO3kT7mxbadbteppSZVcs3FRPvGL5xTY2DbrWSGohmhyVw@mail.gmail.com>
	<6785e9e8-4c64-41b0-9e72-c13d1822b599@gmail.com>
	<CA+wnhO0VdTP9OVdZP9bmkavma2WkE-pYpP1yW8yDwRrJ97j-2g@mail.gmail.com>
	<0c3b0e1b-55d1-42b6-8c3c-4392479187db@gmail.com>
	<CA+wnhO2sHcUOfi6_gvaoPMk=2DsKUOWkDjdUtGxJOguQOXDvOQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<cc488d1c-6477-4e20-8bd0-cf152a2e59bf@gmail.com>
	<CA+wnhO3t7xqCiDmGduxgg1Mv5M5R-GeQd0kzVcJKkUFkj91Wbw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKGLYx2GGd8BggND5QnyyJKbf1r+Q0cEYWrN+miXzaxwGNA@mail.gmail.com>
	<3581840.1728887169@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<3a1ac6f1-ac30-4ed4-8d0d-beb8a5aca7e5@gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKGKOoxiGBqv=RA-e8=LXNhdmRCC_rOYbpaqbL16=4wvJ3A@mail.gmail.com>
	<30fbb76b-4b6f-405e-bf9c-741fe2c7722a@gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKGKKQh7RkUrYfEq+O1AtTgSsRrhR3_t_+dOpz1o9ebuxrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<7428912d-1600-4e79-9aed-fee788e20ca0@gmail.com>
	<CA+hUKG+jd5hiVxiRidLji1EAyKnApN33mNdwpkuOR3NqkfEN0g@mail.gmail.com>

On 18/10/2024 06:34, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 10:48 PM Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov@gmail.com> wrote:
>> BTW, why not to use current case and fix the problem with the 'invalid
>> DSA memory alloc request size 1811939328' itself ?
> 
> I think your patch is good but if you don't mind I'd like to think
> about how to generalise it a bit first, so that it applies to all
> places where we choose nbatch, not just repartitioning.  Unfortunately
> that's a bit circular so I'm still thinking about the tidiest way to
> do it... might take a few days due to travel, and if I don't have
> something soon I guess your patch is better than nothing (it might be
> the most common way we finish up in that sort of trouble).
Thanks. I thought about generalisation, but who knows how the caller 
wants to react in the case of unsuccessful allocation? Should we force 
the user to compare the size requested and allocated? Maybe. I'll wait 
for your solution.
> 
> I'll also push that other patch that cleans up temporary files
> aggressively soon (master only),
Have been waiting for this!
> and try to think about some simple
> ways to avoid large nbatch values that contradict the goal of reducing
> memory for non-skew cases at planning and execution time (probably
> master only)...
Hmm, cost-based maximum number of batches defined at the optimisation stage?

-- 
regards, Andrei Lepikhov






view thread (27+ messages)

Message-ID: <14f5f867-2d85-4faa-8bd2-76dfeda91b37@gmail.com>
Permalink:  ../14f5f867-2d85-4faa-8bd2-76dfeda91b37@gmail.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/14f5f867-2d85-4faa-8bd2-76dfeda91b37@gmail.com

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
  Cc: lepihov@gmail.com, thomas.munro@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, craig@milhiser.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: Reference to - BUG #18349: ERROR: invalid DSA memory alloc request size 1811939328, CONTEXT: parallel worker
  In-Reply-To: <14f5f867-2d85-4faa-8bd2-76dfeda91b37@gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox