Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum

From: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <langote_amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Date: 2020-01-21 06:40:48
Message-ID: CA+fd4k5DEL=rfWwpUNOLMAxovPtMmDU7DZx0fZ9UxZQ3zH2AKg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 15:35, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:30 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2020-01-20 09:09:35 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > Pushed, after fixing these two comments.
> >
> > When attempting to vacuum a large table I just got:
> >
> > postgres=# vacuum FREEZE ;
> > ERROR: invalid memory alloc request size 1073741828
> >
> > #0 palloc (size=1073741828) at /mnt/tools/src/postgresql/src/backend/utils/mmgr/mcxt.c:959
> > #1 0x000056452cc45cac in lazy_space_alloc (vacrelstats=0x56452e5ab0e8, vacrelstats=0x56452e5ab0e8, relblocks=24686152)
> > at /mnt/tools/src/postgresql/src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c:2741
> > #2 lazy_scan_heap (aggressive=true, nindexes=1, Irel=0x56452e5ab1c8, vacrelstats=<optimized out>, params=0x7ffdf8c00290, onerel=<optimized out>)
> > at /mnt/tools/src/postgresql/src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c:786
> > #3 heap_vacuum_rel (onerel=<optimized out>, params=0x7ffdf8c00290, bstrategy=<optimized out>)
> > at /mnt/tools/src/postgresql/src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c:472
> > #4 0x000056452cd8b42c in table_relation_vacuum (bstrategy=<optimized out>, params=0x7ffdf8c00290, rel=0x7fbcdff1e248)
> > at /mnt/tools/src/postgresql/src/include/access/tableam.h:1450
> > #5 vacuum_rel (relid=16454, relation=<optimized out>, params=params(at)entry=0x7ffdf8c00290) at /mnt/tools/src/postgresql/src/backend/commands/vacuum.c:1882
> >
> > Looks to me that the calculation moved into compute_max_dead_tuples()
> > continues to use use an allocation ceiling
> > maxtuples = Min(maxtuples, MaxAllocSize / sizeof(ItemPointerData));
> > but the actual allocation now is
> >
> > #define SizeOfLVDeadTuples(cnt) \
> > add_size((offsetof(LVDeadTuples, itemptrs)), \
> > mul_size(sizeof(ItemPointerData), cnt))
> >
> > i.e. the overhead of offsetof(LVDeadTuples, itemptrs) is not taken into
> > account.
> >
>
> Right, I think we need to take into account in both the places in
> compute_max_dead_tuples():
>
> maxtuples = (vac_work_mem * 1024L) / sizeof(ItemPointerData);
> ..
> maxtuples = Min(maxtuples, MaxAllocSize / sizeof(ItemPointerData));
>
>

Agreed. Attached patch should fix this issue.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
fix_max_dead_tuples.patch application/octet-stream 2.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2020-01-21 06:41:54 Re: PATCH: standby crashed when replay block which truncated in standby but failed to truncate in master node
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-01-21 06:38:03 Re: TRUNCATE on foreign tables