Re: BUG #15700: PG 10 vs. 11: Large increase in memory usage whenselecting BYTEA data (maybe memory leak)
От | Matthias Otterbach |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #15700: PG 10 vs. 11: Large increase in memory usage whenselecting BYTEA data (maybe memory leak) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4ef5f38d5710c4d5c289537c588c7335@otterbach.eu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #15700: PG 10 vs. 11: Large increase in memory usage when selecting BYTEA data (maybe memory leak) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #15700: PG 10 vs. 11: Large increase in memory usage whenselecting BYTEA data (maybe memory leak)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Dear Tom Lane, dear pgsql-bugs list, thanks for your reply and attempt to reproduce my memory issue. Am 2019-03-18 17:33, schrieb Tom Lane: > PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes: > >> I know that I'm also using the JDBC driver here which of course could >> also >> cause the bug, it might be a JDBC driver bug for which I should report >> a bug >> elsewhere. > > I confess that I'm not actually trying this with JDBC, but with > libpq (via psql and pgbench). One could imagine that JDBC is > presenting the query sufficiently differently to cause different > backend behavior, say by asking for binary not text output --- > but I tried that, no change. Can I do anything to figure out how the JDBC driver presents the query? Is there any information available if I increase a log level or enable any debugging output in the PostgreSQL server? I tried increasing log levels a little bit, but actually I do not know if it gives any more information: log_min_messages = debug5 log_min_error_statement = debug5 debug_print_parse = on debug_print_rewritten = on debug_print_plan = on debug_pretty_print = on log_connections = on log_disconnections = on log_duration = on log_error_verbosity = verbose You can find an extract from the logfile at https://pastebin.com/5eB0t0uS (filtered for my process id which caused the crash even though there were not many other processes as I use this virtual machine solely for this test query). > I think there must be some other moving parts you haven't mentioned. > Maybe you have some PG extension(s) installed? Actually I hope not, that is why I tried to reproduce the problem with a vanilla Ubuntu and PostgreSQL installation in a virtual machine - to make sure that there are no other extensions or anything influence my issue. Actually "postgres=# select * from pg_extension;" returns: extname | extowner | extnamespace | extrelocatable | extversion | extconfig | extcondition ---------+----------+--------------+----------------+------------+-----------+-------------- plpgsql | 10 | 11 | f | 1.0 | | (1 row) Best regards, Matthias Otterbach
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: