"Heinemann, Manfred (IMS)" <HeinemannM@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Here is an example where I can show significant extra memory consumption when setting search_path on a function: I got around to testing this example today, and I don't see what you're seeing --- the memory consumption seems stable, and about the same with or without the "SET search_path" clause. You didn't specify exactly how to do this bit: --populate 1,000,000 rows with random values from 1,000 surnames for 'SURNAME' so I did it like this: INSERT INTO test_search_path(date_last_modified, last_name) select clock_timestamp(), (random()*1000)::int::text from generate_series(1,1000000); The example doesn't seem like it'd be terribly data-dependent, but maybe that's wrong? Also, I assume you're running a reasonably up-to-date PG release, otherwise I'd be wondering about leaks in the GIN index AM; we've fixed some issues of that sort in GIN bulk updates in the past. But again, it's not clear what the connection to a function SET clause would be. So I lack a plausible theory at the moment. regards, tom lane