On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 16:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > tuplesort.c does its own accounting, and TBH that seems like the right > > thing to do here, too. The difficulty is, I think, that some > > transition functions use an internal data type for the transition > > state, which might not be a single palloc'd chunk. But since we can't > > spill those aggregates to disk *anyway*, that doesn't really matter. > > So would it be acceptable to just ignore the memory consumed by > "internal", or come up with some heuristic? > > Regards, > Jeff Davis > > I think a heuristic would be more suited here and ignoring memory consumption for internal types means that we are not making the memory accounting useful for a set of usecases. -- Regards, Atri *l'apprenant*
