From: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-patches@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re:
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 06:58:31 -0700
Message-ID: <44D0AF87.2030304@joeconway.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15263.1154526181@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <44B69778.5050104@dunslane.net>
<50461.84.63.113.55.1152832991.squirrel@pezone.net>
<ECCAAC0A3182895D3D12B0E8@[172.26.14.247]>
<44B7ADFC.90205@dunslane.net>
<44D03D9F.80203@joeconway.com>
<15263.1154526181@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane wrote:
> Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
>
>>This patch retains the memory consumption savings but doesn't break any
>>regression tests...
>
>
> I'm unconvinced that retail pfree's are the way to go. I just did some
> profiling of this test case:
<snip>
> It's slightly depressing that there's not more time being spent in
> places we can easily tweak, but anyway the salient point to me is
> that AllocSetFree is already chewing a nontrivial part of the runtime.
That's undoubtedly true, and important for the case that isn't memory
constrained (but where I'm already seeing us perform relatively well).
But once we start the machine swapping, runtime goes in the toilet. And
without addressing the memory leak somehow, we will start a machine
swapping significantly earlier than mysql.
Joe
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-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: mail@joeconway.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-patches@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re:
In-Reply-To: <44D0AF87.2030304@joeconway.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