Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #5608: array_agg() consumes too much memory
Hitoshi Harada writes: > 2010/8/14 Itagaki Takahiro : >> The attached patch is the near-term fix; it adds ALLOCSET_DEFAULT_INITSIZE >> bytes to memory assumption. >> >> We might need the same adjustment for string_agg(), that consumes >> 1024 bytes for the transit condition. array_agg() and string_agg() >> are only aggregates that have "internal" for aggtranstype. > So, is it better to generalize as it adds ALLOCSET_DEFAULT_INITSIZE if > the transtype is internal, rather than specifying individual function > OID as the patch stands? I've applied a patch following Hitoshi-san's idea. BTW, a note about the upthread patch: we don't do manual #define's for OIDs in pg_proc.h. Use fmgroids.h for that. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #5608: array_agg() consumes too much memory
Hitoshi Harada writes: > 2010/8/14 Itagaki Takahiro : >> 2010/8/10 Tom Lane : >>> Eventually it might be nice to have some sort of way to specify the >>> estimate to use for any aggregate function --- but for a near-term >>> fix maybe we should just hard-wire a special case for array_agg in >>> count_agg_clauses_walker(). > So, is it better to generalize as it adds ALLOCSET_DEFAULT_INITSIZE if > the transtype is internal, rather than specifying individual function > OID as the patch stands? Seems like a good idea ... it's ugly, but it seems much less likely to need maintenance. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #5608: array_agg() consumes too much memory
2010/8/14 Itagaki Takahiro : > 2010/8/10 Tom Lane : >> Eventually it might be nice to have some sort of way to specify the >> estimate to use for any aggregate function --- but for a near-term >> fix maybe we should just hard-wire a special case for array_agg in >> count_agg_clauses_walker(). > > The attached patch is the near-term fix; it adds ALLOCSET_DEFAULT_INITSIZE > bytes to memory assumption. > > We might need the same adjustment for string_agg(), that consumes > 1024 bytes for the transit condition. array_agg() and string_agg() > are only aggregates that have "internal" for aggtranstype. So, is it better to generalize as it adds ALLOCSET_DEFAULT_INITSIZE if the transtype is internal, rather than specifying individual function OID as the patch stands? Regards, -- Hitoshi Harada -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] BUG #5608: array_agg() consumes too much memory
2010/8/10 Tom Lane : > Eventually it might be nice to have some sort of way to specify the > estimate to use for any aggregate function --- but for a near-term > fix maybe we should just hard-wire a special case for array_agg in > count_agg_clauses_walker(). The attached patch is the near-term fix; it adds ALLOCSET_DEFAULT_INITSIZE bytes to memory assumption. We might need the same adjustment for string_agg(), that consumes 1024 bytes for the transit condition. array_agg() and string_agg() are only aggregates that have "internal" for aggtranstype. -- Itagaki Takahiro array_agg_memcalc.patch Description: Binary data -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
