On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:59 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Brian Crowell <brian@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> wrote:
>>> So what does the script actually do? Because psql certainly is not
>>> running pl/pgsql procedures on it's own. We need to understand why
>>> you're getting OOM in the first place - just inserts alone should not
>>> cause failures like that. Please show us more detailed explanation of
>>> what the load actually does, so that we can try reproducing it.
>
>> Perhaps the script is one giant insert statement?
>
> It's pretty clear from the memory map that the big space consumption
> is inside a single invocation of a plpgsql function:
>
> SPI Proc: 2464408024 total in 279 blocks; 1672 free (1 chunks); 2464406352 used
> PL/pgSQL function context: 537911352 total in 74 blocks; 2387536 free (4 chunks); 535523816 used
>
> So whatever's going on here, there's more to it than a giant client-issued
> INSERT (or COPY), or for that matter a large number of small ones. What
> would seem to be required is a many-megabyte-sized plpgsql function body
> or DO block.
>
> Actually, the truly weird thing about that map is that the "PL/pgSQL
> function context" seems to be a child of a "SPI Proc" context, whereas
> it's entirely clear from the code that it ought to be a direct child of
> TopMemoryContext. I have no idea how this state of affairs came to be,
> and am interested to find out.
>
> regards, tom lane
Yes I did generate 1 large DO block:
DO $$
DECLARE thingid bigint; thingrec bigint; thingdataid bigint;
BEGIN
INSERT INTO thing
(ltn,classification,machine,source,thgrec,flags,serial,type) VALUES
('T007336','THING',0,1025,7336,7,'XXX869977564',1) RETURNING id,thgrec
INTO thingid,thingrec;
INSERT INTO recnum_thing (recnum,thing_id) VALUES (thingrec,thingid);
INSERT INTO thingstatus
(thing_id,nrpts,rmks_cs,force_type_id,ftn_cs,force_code,arr_cs,mask,toi_state,plot_id,signa_cs,lastchange,des_cs,rig_cs,ownship,correlation,maxrpts,rtn_cs,ctc_cs,group_mask,dep_cs)
VALUES (thingid,121,'{0,0,0,0}',440,0,23,0,0,0,'{23,-1,3803,3805,-1,-1,0,6}',0,1509459164,0,0,0,0,1000,0,0,0,0);
INSERT INTO thinger
(thing_id,spe_key,cse_unc,lat_spd,cov,dtg,lng,spd,ave_spd,cse,tol,nrpts,lat,alpha,sigma,spd_unc,lng_spd)
VALUES (thingid,-1,0.0,-6.58197336634e-08,'{4.27624291532e-09,0.0,3.07802916488e-09,0.0,4.27624291532e-09,0.0,3.07802916488e-09,4.16110417234e-08,0.0,4.16110417234e-08}',1509459163,2.21596980095,0.000226273215958,1.0,0.0,0.10000000149,121,0.584555745125,10.0,4.23079740131e-08,0.0,-2.49999881907e-10);
INSERT INTO thingdata
(thing_id,category,db_num,xref,org_type,trademark,shortname,fcode,platform,callsign,type,orig_xref,shipclass,home_base,uic,service,di,lngfixed,hull,precision,alert,flag,besufx,name,mmsi,catcode,ntds,imo,pn_num,chxref,threat,sconum,latfixed,db_type,pif,echelon,jtn,quantity,overwrite)
VALUES (thingid,'XXX','','','','','004403704','23','','','','','UNEQUATED','','','','',0.0,'','{0,0,0,0,0}','','KS','','UNKNOWN','004403704','','','','','','AFD','',0.0,3,'','',0,0,0)
RETURNING id INTO thingdataid;
INSERT INTO thingnum (thingdata_id,thgnum,state,dtg,cmd) VALUES
(thingdataid,'013086',0,1502970401,'FOO');
<repeated for each thing>
END $$;
Should I limit the number of 'thing' inserts within a DO block or
wrapping each 'thing' insert in it's own DO block?
