Pavel Stehule escribió: > 2010/3/11 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: > >> The problem is in very large small allocations - there are 853215 nodes. > >> I replaced palloc0 inside mkSPnode by balloc > > > > This goes back to the idea we've discussed from time to time of having a > > variant memory context type in which pfree() is a no-op and we dispense > > with all the per-chunk overhead. I guess that if there really isn't any > > overhead there then pfree/repalloc would actually crash :-( but for the > > particular case of dictionaries that would probably be OK because > > there's so little code that touches them. > > it has a sense. I was surprised how much memory is necessary :(. Some > smarter allocation save 50% - 2.5G for 100 users, what is important, > but I thing, so these data has to be shared. I believed to preloading, > but it is problematic - there are no data in shared preload time, and > the allocated size is too big.
Could it be mmapped and shared that way? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
