Re: PATCH: decreasing memory needlessly consumed by array_agg

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PATCH: decreasing memory needlessly consumed by array_agg
Date: 2014-12-29 07:37:12
Message-ID: 1419838632.24895.87.camel@jeff-desktop
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 13:00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> writes:
> > i.e. either destroy the whole context if possible, and just free the
> > memory when using a shared memory context. But I'm afraid this would
> > penalize the shared memory context, because that's intended for cases
> > where all the build states coexist in parallel and then at some point
> > are all converted into a result and thrown away. Adding pfree() calls is
> > no improvement here, and just wastes cycles.
>
> FWIW, I quite dislike the terminology "shared memory context", because
> it sounds too much like it means "a context in shared memory". I see
> that the patch itself doesn't use that phrase, which is good, but can
> we come up with some other phrase for talking about it?
>

"Common memory context"?

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2014-12-29 07:38:14 Re: PATCH: decreasing memory needlessly consumed by array_agg
Previous Message Dilip kumar 2014-12-29 05:40:14 Re: TODO : Allow parallel cores to be used by vacuumdb [ WIP ]