| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Bertrand Petit <elrond(at)phoe(dot)frmug(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 7.4 beta 1 getting out of swap |
| Date: | 2003-08-17 22:25:08 |
| Message-ID: | 2518.1061159108@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
> Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
> 3. Set up a long-lived cache internal to the array functions that can
> translate element type OID to the needed lookup data, and won't leak
> memory across repeated calls. This is not the fastest or most general
> solution, but it seems the most localized and safest fix.
>> It seems to me that #3 is the least risky, and even if it isn't the best
>> possible performance, this is the initial implementation of indexes on
>> arrays, so it isn't like we're taking away something. Maybe solution #2
>> is better held as a performance enhancement for 7.5.
> I'm leaning that way too. It occurs to me also that the same cache
> could be used to eliminate repeated lookups in sorting setup --- which
> would not be much of a win percentagewise, compared to the sort itself,
> but still it seems worth doing.
I've committed fixes for this, and verified that inserts/updates on an
indexed array column don't leak memory anymore.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-17 23:50:35 | Re: bidirectional cursors on views |
| Previous Message | Shachar Shemesh | 2003-08-17 19:28:31 | Re: bidirectional cursors on views |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-08-18 06:21:32 | Re: Insert performance |
| Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-08-17 15:06:19 | Re: [PERFORM] PostgreSQL vs. MySQL |