Hi, hackers,
Looking at the planner behaviour with the memory consumption patch [1], I
figured out that arrays increase memory consumption by the optimizer
significantly. See init.sql in attachment.
The point here is that the planner does small memory allocations for each
element during
Using your patch I found out one redundant memory usage in the planner [1]. It
can be interesting as an example of how this patch can detect problems.
[1] Optimize planner memory consumption for huge arrays
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023, at 11:51 AM, Andy Fan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 4:30 PM Andrey Lepikhov
> wrote:
>> Hi, all.
>>
>> Some of my clients use JOIN's with three - four clauses. Quite
>> frequently, I see complaints on unreasonable switch of JOIN algorithm to
>> Merge Join
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, at 7:55 AM, tsunakawa.ta...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> From: Craig Ringer
>> Currently my options are "dump all shmem including shared_buffers" or
>> "dump no shmem". But I usually want "dump all shmem except
>> shared_buffers". It's tolerable to just dump s_b on a test system
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023, at 8:09 PM, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> Hi Lepikhov,
>
> Thanks for using my patch and I am glad that you found it useful.
>
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 10:56 AM Lepikhov Andrei
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, hackers,
>>
>> Looking at the planner beha
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023, at 1:09 PM, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2023-09-06 11:17, James Coleman wrote:
> It seems that we can know what queries were running from the stack
> traces you shared.
> As described above, I suspect a lock which was acquired prior to
> ProcessLogQueryPlanInterrupt() caused the
On Mon, Sep 4, 2023, at 3:37 PM, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 11:58 AM Lepikhov Andrei
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, hackers,
>>
>> Looking at the planner behaviour with the memory consumption patch [1], I
>> figured out that arrays increase
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023, at 8:39 PM, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2023-09-15 15:21, Lepikhov Andrei wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2023, at 1:09 PM, torikoshia wrote:
>> I have explored this patch and, by and large, agree with the code. But
>> some questions I want to discuss:
>>
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023, at 5:04 PM, Yuya Watari wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 5:21 PM Andrey Lepikhov
> wrote:
>> Working on self-join removal in the thread [1] nearby, I stuck into the
>> problem, which made an additional argument to work in this new direction
>> than a couple of previous ones.
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023, at 4:49 PM, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sept 2023 at 19:56, Andrey Lepikhov
> wrote:
>> What could you say about a different way: hybrid join? In MS SQL Server,
>> they have such a feature [1], and, according to their description, it
>> requires low overhead. They
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023, at 5:05 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What I am concerned about from the report [1] is that this comment is
> a bit too terse; it might cause a misunderstanding that extensions can
> do different things than we intend to allow:
>
> /*
> * 6. Finally, give
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023, at 12:53 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 11:49 AM Lepikhov Andrei
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2023, at 5:05 PM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> > What I am concerned about from the report [1] is that this comment is
>>
12 matches
Mail list logo
