Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:36:20 -0300
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large
 in-progress transactions
Message-ID: <20190926193620.GA16836@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20190926193359.GA16585@alvherre.pgsql>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-Sep-26, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> How certain are you about the approach to measure memory used by a
> reorderbuffer transaction ... does it not cause a measurable performance
> drop?  I wonder if it would make more sense to use a separate contexts
> per transaction and use context-level accounting (per the patch Jeff
> Davis posted elsewhere for hash joins ... though I see now that that
> only works fot aset.c, not other memcxt implementations), or something
> like that.

Oh, I just noticed that that patch was posted separately in its own
thread, and that that improved version does include support for other
memory context implementations.  Excellent.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services