public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feed[PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
24+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v8 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 47a5271b91..b4f523e32d 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--AZuoSAvZwvV/ife4--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index 2059428e2a..04b0598183 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -703,7 +703,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--3yNHWXBV/QO9xKNm--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v10 4/4] WIP: check tuple size
@ 2020-12-01 23:20 Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-12-01 23:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
Or maybe INSERT should flush buffer based only on the *number* of tuples, and
not their size ?
---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
index e018946c0e..ec9e43ac55 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c
@@ -760,7 +760,13 @@ ExecInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
batchslot = MultiInsertInfoNextFreeSlot(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
ExecCopySlot(batchslot, slot);
- MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot, 0, 0); // XXX: tuplen/lineno
+ MultiInsertInfoStore(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo, batchslot,
+ // sizeof(void*) * batchslot->tts_nvalid, /* tuple size - underestimate */
+ MemoryContextMemAllocated(batchslot->tts_mcxt, true), /* tuple size */
+ mtstate->ntuples); /* lineno */
+
+ elog(DEBUG2, "bufferedBytes %d; tuples %ld",
+ mtstate->miinfo->bufferedBytes, mtstate->ntuples);
if (MultiInsertInfoIsFull(mtstate->miinfo))
MultiInsertInfoFlush(mtstate->miinfo, resultRelInfo);
--
2.17.0
--8nsIa27JVQLqB7/C--
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: Remove WIN32 conditional compilation from win32common.c
@ 2024-02-12 09:58 Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: Heikki Linnakangas @ 2024-02-12 09:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tristan Partin <[email protected]>; pgsql-hackers
On 05/12/2023 20:37, Tristan Partin wrote:
> The file is only referenced in Meson and MSVC scripts from what I can
> tell, and the Meson reference is protected by a Windows check.
There are a bunch of files like win32common.c:
$ ls src/port/win32*.c
src/port/win32common.c
src/port/win32dlopen.c
src/port/win32env.c
src/port/win32error.c
src/port/win32fdatasync.c
src/port/win32fseek.c
src/port/win32gai_strerror.c
src/port/win32getrusage.c
src/port/win32gettimeofday.c
src/port/win32link.c
src/port/win32ntdll.c
src/port/win32pread.c
src/port/win32pwrite.c
src/port/win32security.c
src/port/win32setlocale.c
src/port/win32stat.c
Of these, win32stat.c and win32fseek.c also contain "#ifdef WIN32", but
others don't. So I concur that the most common pattern in these files is
to not use #ifdef WIN32, and +1 for making them consistent.
I removed those from win32stat.c and win32fseek.c, too, and committed.
Thanks!
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-12 09:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v8 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v10 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2020-12-01 23:20 [PATCH v9 4/4] WIP: check tuple size Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2024-02-12 09:58 Re: Remove WIN32 conditional compilation from win32common.c Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox