Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20201207144851.GA15854@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Huge memory consumption on partitioned table with FKs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-Dec-07, Amit Langote wrote: > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:05 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi > <horikyota.ntt@gmail.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@mail.gmail.com committed (which I have not read yet.) Do you agree with this plan?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: