Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, keisuke kuroda <keisuke(dot)kuroda(dot)3862(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, tatsuhito(dot)kasahara(dot)rd(at)hco(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp
Subject: Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs
Date: 2021-03-11 17:44:37
Message-ID: 2308674.1615484677@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> Now, maybe it's a coincidence that husky failed on a
> partitioned-foreign-key test right after this patch went in, but I bet
> not. Since husky runs CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS, it looks to me like we've
> overlooked some cache-reset scenario or other.

After reproducing it here, that *is* a coincidence. I shall now go beat
up on the correct blame-ee, instead.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-03-11 18:00:44 Re: Parallel INSERT (INTO ... SELECT ...)
Previous Message Mark Dilger 2021-03-11 17:42:22 Re: pg_amcheck contrib application