Re: Should pg 11 use a lot more memory building an spgist index?

Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Hmm, in my hands this produces the same size leak (~28GB) in either v10
>> or v11. In HEAD, somebody's made it even worse (~43GB). So this is
>> certainly pretty broken, but I'm not sure why it seems worse to you in
>> v11 than before.

> As a short term work around, could I create the index first and use
> insert statements, each in their own transaction, to get the table loaded
> with the index?

Yes; it might also be that you don't even need to break it up into
separate statements.

> Is the issue on Fedora taking very long to build a normal spgist index for
> network addresses worth pursuing separately, or is it likely to be the same
> underlying cause?

This issue only applies if it was an exclusion constraint. If you saw
slowness or bloat with a plain index, that would be worth investigating
separately.

regards, tom lane