From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PATCH: decreasing memory needlessly consumed by array_agg |
Date: | 2014-12-29 07:37:12 |
Message-ID: | 1419838632.24895.87.camel@jeff-desktop |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 13:00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> writes:
> > i.e. either destroy the whole context if possible, and just free the
> > memory when using a shared memory context. But I'm afraid this would
> > penalize the shared memory context, because that's intended for cases
> > where all the build states coexist in parallel and then at some point
> > are all converted into a result and thrown away. Adding pfree() calls is
> > no improvement here, and just wastes cycles.
>
> FWIW, I quite dislike the terminology "shared memory context", because
> it sounds too much like it means "a context in shared memory". I see
> that the patch itself doesn't use that phrase, which is good, but can
> we come up with some other phrase for talking about it?
>
"Common memory context"?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2014-12-29 07:38:14 | Re: PATCH: decreasing memory needlessly consumed by array_agg |
Previous Message | Dilip kumar | 2014-12-29 05:40:14 | Re: TODO : Allow parallel cores to be used by vacuumdb [ WIP ] |