| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniil Davydov <3danissimo(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal : Use bump memory context for temp buffers |
| Date: | 2025-12-16 13:51:14 |
| Message-ID: | e3c9f95d-81a8-4cc1-8836-942e7ad86430@iki.fi |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 16/12/2025 15:05, Daniil Davydov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Commit [1] introduced a new memory context suitable for situations when we
> should allocate a large amount of memory with no need to free or reallocate it.
>
> I think that it will be useful for temp buffers :
> 1) We allocate them lazily and never try to free them.
> 2) Some users are very active in working with temporary tables, and as
> a result,
> they set large values for the "temp_buffers" parameter (several gigabytes).
>
> Thus, the use case for temp buffers seems to perfectly fit for bump
> memory context.
> What do you think?
It makes no difference. The bump memory context is useful if you perform
a lot of small allocations, because it skips the overhead of the chunk
headers. In LocalBufferContext, we only ever make one allocation.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nazir Bilal Yavuz | 2025-12-16 13:58:03 | Running GSSAPI / Kerberos tests on Windows |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2025-12-16 13:43:53 | Re: Revisiting {CREATE INDEX, REINDEX} CONCURRENTLY improvements |