From: | "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bharath Rupireddy" <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: Parallel INSERT (INTO ... SELECT ...) |
Date: | 2021-01-22 01:08:15 |
Message-ID: | 6f73f94e7e4e4e66be18a474d4b5a625@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> >
> > +
> > + index_oid_list = RelationGetIndexList(rel);
> > ...
> >
> > As memtioned in the comments of RelationGetIndexList:
> > * we return a copy of the list palloc'd in the caller's context. The
> > caller
> > * may list_free() the returned list after scanning it.
> >
> > Shall we list_free(index_oid_list) at the end of function ?
> > Just to avoid potential memory leak.
> >
>
> I think that's a good idea, so I'll make that update in the next version
> of the patch.
> I do notice, however, that there seems to be quite a few places in the Postgres
> code where RelationGetIndexList() is being called without a corresponding
> list_free() being called - obviously instead relying on it being deallocated
> when the caller's memory-context is destroyed.
>
Yes, it will be deallocated when the caller's memory-context is destroyed.
Currently, parallel safety-check check each partition.
I am just a little worried about if there are lots of partition here, it may cause high memory use.
And there is another place like this:
1.
+ conbin = TextDatumGetCString(val);
+ check_expr = stringToNode(conbin);
It seems we can free the cobin when not used(for the same reason above).
What do you think ?
Best regards,
houzj
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-01-22 01:12:01 | Re: vacuum_cost_page_miss default value and modern hardware |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2021-01-22 01:05:55 | Re: WIP: BRIN multi-range indexes |