Re: [HACKERS] Rethinking autovacuum.c memory handling

On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I notice that autovacuum.c calls autovacuum_do_vac_analyze, and
> thereby vacuum(), in TopTransactionContext.  This doesn't seem
> like a terribly great idea, because it doesn't correspond to what
> happens during a manually-invoked vacuum.

Indeed, the inconsistency is not good here.

> What I think we should do instead is invoke autovacuum_do_vac_analyze
> in the PortalContext that do_autovacuum has created, which we already
> have a mechanism to reset once per table processed in do_autovacuum.
>
> The attached patch does that, and also modifies perform_work_item()
> to use the same approach.  Right now perform_work_item() has a
> copied-and-pasted MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren(PortalContext)
> call in its error recovery path, but that seems a bit out of place
> given that perform_work_item() isn't using PortalContext otherwise.

I have spent some time looking at your patch and testing it. This
looks sane. A small comment that I have would be to add an assertion
at the top of perform_work_item to be sure that it is called in the
memory context of AutovacMemCxt.
-- 
Michael


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers