Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression

From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression
Date: 2020-03-19 09:47:17
Message-ID: CA+HiwqHB3WgZ+EmrqsFApLdS3rQMiyMQoMYskSStOLJ2pq_PCQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Pavel,

Sorry it took me a while to look at this.

On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 4:28 AM Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> po 24. 2. 2020 v 18:56 odesílatel Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> napsal:
>> But I found one issue - I don't know if this issue is related to your patch or plpgsql_check.
>>
>> plpgsql_check try to clean after it was executed - it cleans all plans. But some pointers on simple expressions are broken after catched exceptions.
>>
>> expr->plan = 0x80. Is interesting, so other fields of this expressions are correct.
>
> I am not sure, but after patching the SPI_prepare_params the current memory context is some short memory context.
>
> Can SPI_prepare_params change current memory context? It did before. But after patching different memory context is active.

I haven't been able to see the behavior you reported. Could you let
me know what unexpected memory context you see in the problematic
case?

--
Thank you,
Amit

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2020-03-19 09:48:32 Re: error context for vacuum to include block number
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-03-19 09:32:57 Re: Internal key management system