Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 12:04 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
<horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> At Tue, 8 Dec 2020 01:16:00 +0900, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> > Hi Alvaro,
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 23:48 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> >
> > > On 2020-Dec-07, Amit Langote wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:05 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi
> > > > <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > > > > Also, the comment that was in RI_ConstraintInfo now appears in
> > > > > > RI_ConstraintParam, and the new struct (RI_ConstraintInfo) is now
> > > > > > undocumented. What is the relationship between those two structs? I
> > > > > > see that they have pointers to each other, but I think the
> > > relationship
> > > > > > should be documented more clearly.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure the footprint of this patch worth doing but here is a bit
> > > > > more polished version.
> > > >
> > > > I noticed that the foreign_key test fails and it may have to do with
> > > > the fact that a partition's param info remains attached to the
> > > > parent's RI_ConstraintInfo even after it's detached from the parent
> > > > table using DETACH PARTITION.
> > >
> > > I think this bit about splitting the struct is a distraction. Let's get
> > > a patch that solves the bug first, and then we can discuss what further
> > > refinements we want to do. I think we should get your patch in
> > > CA+HiwqEOrfN9b=f3sDmySPGc4gO-L_VMFHXLLxVmmdP34e64+w(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com
> > > committed (which I have not read yet.) Do you agree with this plan?
> >
> >
> > Yeah, I agree.
>
> Or https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+HiwqGrr2YOO6voBM6m_OAc9w-WMxe1gOuQ-UyDPin6zJtyZw@mail.gmail.com ?
>
> +1 from me to either one.

Oh, I hadn't actually checked the actual message that Alvaro
mentioned, but yeah I too am fine with either that one or the latest
one.

--
Amit Langote
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com