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 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
* [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 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
* Failure during Building Postgres in Windows with Meson @ 2023-11-09 08:59 Shlok Kyal <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 24+ messages in thread From: Shlok Kyal @ 2023-11-09 08:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]> Hi, I am trying to build postgres with meson on Windows. And I am stuck in the process. Steps I followed: 1. I clone postgres repo 2.Installed meson and ninja pip install meson ninja 3. Then running following command: meson setup build --buildtype debug 4. Then I ran cd build ninja Got following error D:\project\repo\pg_meson\postgres\build>C:\Users\kyals\AppData\Roaming\Python\Python311\Scripts\ninja ninja: error: 'src/backend/postgres_lib.a.p/meson_pch-c.obj', needed by 'src/backend/postgres.exe', missing and no known rule to make it. Any thoughts on how to resolve this error? Thanks Shlok Kumar Kyal ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 24+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-11-09 08:59 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 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 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]> 2023-11-09 08:59 Failure during Building Postgres in Windows with Meson Shlok Kyal <[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