Hi Alexander, thanks for the feedback.
> I can reproduce the high memory consumption with your queries. > > Looking at the patch, I see that you changed the lifetime of the temporary > context from per-tuple to per-index-scan. It is not obvious that this change > is correct. Could you explain, what memory context are involved in the scan, > and what their lifetimes are, before and after your changes? What are these > memory allocations that are causing the high consumption, and what code > makes them? This will make it easier to understand your changes. > Yes, you are right, I changed the temporary context for calling the user-defined inner consistent method from per-tuple to per-index-scan. For boxes this function is spg_box_quad_inner_consistent in geo_spgist.c that allocates nodes, RangeBoxes, and RectBoxes. The problem before this patch was that the traversalMemoryContext in this function was set to per-query lifetime. The memory allocations in the per-query lifetime caused this high memory consumption. I changed the temporary context to per-index-scan so that it can also be used for traversalMemoryContext. Calling the function in per-index-scan lifetime did cause a high memory consumption. The better alternative may be to have two temporary memory contexts, one per-tuple for calling the inner consistent method and one per-index-scan for the traversal memory. What do you think? > >> >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAPqRbE5vTGWCGrOc91Bmu-0o7CwsU0UCnAshOtpDR8cSpSjy0g%40mail.gmail.com#capqrbe5vtgwcgroc91bmu-0o7cwsu0ucnashotpdr8cspsj...@mail.gmail.com > > > Also, this link doesn't open for me. > The link works perfectly fine for me. Best regards, Anton
