On 11/6/23 19:54, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
>
> ...
>
> Tangent: Do we have specific notes on worst-case memory usage of
> memory contexts with various allocation patterns? This new bump
> allocator seems to be quite efficient, but in a worst-case allocation
> pattern it can still waste about 1/3 of its allocated memory due to
> never using free space on previous blocks after an allocation didn't
> fit on that block.
> It probably isn't going to be a huge problem in general, but this
> seems like something that could be documented as a potential problem
> when you're looking for which allocator to use and compare it with
> other allocators that handle different allocation sizes more
> gracefully.
>
I don't think it's documented anywhere, but I agree it might be an
interesting piece of information. It probably did not matter too much
when we had just AllocSet, but now we have 3 very different allocators,
so maybe we should explain this.
When implementing these allocators, it didn't feel that important,
because the new allocators started as intended for a very specific part
of the code (as in "This piece of code has a very unique allocation
pattern, let's develop a custom allocator for it."), but if we feel we
want to make it simpler to use the allocators elsewhere ...
I think there are two obvious places where to document this - either in
the header of each memory context .c file, or a README in the mmgr
directory. Or some combination of it.
At some point I was thinking about writing a "proper paper" comparing
these allocators in a more scientific / thorough way, but I never got to
do it. I wonder if that'd be interesting for enough people.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company