Re: memory leak in trigger handling (since PG12)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: memory leak in trigger handling (since PG12) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 960113.1684859980@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | memory leak in trigger handling (since PG12) (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: memory leak in trigger handling (since PG12)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> writes: > it seems there's a fairly annoying memory leak in trigger code, > introduced by > ... > Attached is a patch, restoring the pre-12 behavior for me. > While looking for other places allocating stuff in ExecutorState (for > the UPDATE case) and leaving it there, I found two more cases: > 1) copy_plpgsql_datums > 2) make_expanded_record_from_tupdesc > make_expanded_record_from_exprecord > All of this is calls from plpgsql_exec_trigger. Not sure about the expanded-record case, but both of your other two fixes feel like poor substitutes for pushing the memory into a shorter-lived context. In particular I'm quite surprised that plpgsql isn't already allocating that workspace in the "procedure" memory context. > I wonder how much we should care about these cases. On the one hand we > often leave the cleanup up to the memory context, but the assumption is > the context is not unnecessarily long-lived. And ExecutorState is not > that. And leaking memory per-row does not seem great either. I agree per-row leaks in the ExecutorState context are not cool. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: