Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks in relcache
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks in relcache |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 199907070816.EAA09934@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Memory leaks in relcache (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks in relcache
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom, where are we on this. As I remember, it is still an open issue, right? I can add it to the TODO list. > I have been looking into why a reference to a nonexistent table, eg > INSERT INTO nosuchtable VALUES(1); > leaks a small amount of memory per occurrence. What I find is a > memory leak in the indexscan support. Specifically, > RelationGetIndexScan in backend/access/index/genam.c palloc's both > an IndexScanDesc and some keydata storage. The IndexScanDesc > block is eventually pfree'd, at the bottom of CatalogIndexFetchTuple > in backend/catalog/indexing.c. But the keydata block is not. > > This wouldn't matter so much if the palloc were coming from a > transaction-local context. But what we're doing is a lookup in pg_class > on behalf of RelationBuildDesc in backend/utils/cache/relcache.c, and > it's done a MemoryContextSwitchTo into the global CacheCxt before > starting the lookup. Therefore, the un-pfreed block represents a > permanent memory leak. > > In fact, *every* reference to a relation that is not already present in > the relcache causes a similar leak. The error case is just the one that > is easiest to repeat. The missing pfree of the keydata block is > probably causing a bunch of other short-term and long-term leaks too. > > It seems to me there are two things to fix here: indexscan ought to > pfree everything it pallocs, and RelationBuildDesc ought to be warier > about how much work gets done with CacheCxt as the active palloc > context. (Even if indexscan didn't leak anything ordinarily, there's > still the risk of elog(ERROR) causing an abort before the indexscan code > gets to clean up.) > > Comments? In particular, where is the cleanest place to add the pfree > of the keydata block? I don't especially like the fact that callers > of index_endscan have to clean up the toplevel scan block; I think that > ought to happen inside index_endscan. > > regards, tom lane > > -- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: