Skip to content

P
Postgres FD Implementation
Commit c4f4c7ca authored by Tom Lane's avatar Tom Lane
Browse files
Options

Improve mmgr README. 

Add documentation about the new reset callback mechanism.

Also, at long last, recast the existing text so that it describes the
current context mechanisms as established fact rather than something
we're going to implement.  Shoulda done that in 2001 or so ...
parent d61f1a93
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
Showing with 123 additions and 111 deletions
src/backend/utils/mmgr/README
View file @ c4f4c7ca
......@@ -14,10 +14,10 @@ memory management system implemented in 7.1.
Background
----------
We already do most of our memory allocation in "memory contexts", which
are usually AllocSets as implemented by backend/utils/mmgr/aset.c. What
we need to do is create more contexts and define proper rules about when
they can be freed.
We do most of our memory allocation in "memory contexts", which are usually
AllocSets as implemented by src/backend/utils/mmgr/aset.c. The key to
successful memory management without lots of overhead is to define a useful
set of contexts with appropriate lifespans.
The basic operations on a memory context are:
......@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ The basic operations on a memory context are:
context object itself)
Given a chunk of memory previously allocated from a context, one can
free it or reallocate it larger or smaller (corresponding to standard
free it or reallocate it larger or smaller (corresponding to standard C
library's free() and realloc() routines). These operations return memory
to or get more memory from the same context the chunk was originally
allocated in.
......@@ -46,11 +46,11 @@ so that the caller can restore the previous context before exiting).
The main advantage of memory contexts over plain use of malloc/free is
that the entire contents of a memory context can be freed easily, without
having to request freeing of each individual chunk within it. This is
both faster and more reliable than per-chunk bookkeeping. We already use
this fact to clean up at transaction end: by resetting all the active
contexts, we reclaim all memory. What we need are additional contexts
that can be reset or deleted at strategic times within a query, such as
after each tuple.
both faster and more reliable than per-chunk bookkeeping. We use this
fact to clean up at transaction end: by resetting all the active contexts
of transaction or shorter lifespan, we can reclaim all transient memory.
Similarly, we can clean up at the end of each query, or after each tuple
is processed during a query.
Some Notes About the palloc API Versus Standard C Library
......@@ -64,11 +64,9 @@ are some notes to clarify the behavior.
return NULL, and it is not necessary or useful to test for such a result.
* palloc(0) is explicitly a valid operation. It does not return a NULL
pointer, but a valid chunk of which no bytes may be used. (However, the
pointer, but a valid chunk of which no bytes may be used. However, the
chunk might later be repalloc'd larger; it can also be pfree'd without
error.) (Note: this behavior is new in Postgres 8.0; earlier versions
disallowed palloc(0). It seems more consistent to allow it, however.)
Similarly, repalloc allows realloc'ing to zero size.
error. Similarly, repalloc allows realloc'ing to zero size.
* pfree and repalloc do not accept a NULL pointer. This is intentional.
......@@ -76,20 +74,16 @@ Similarly, repalloc allows realloc'ing to zero size.
pfree/repalloc No Longer Depend On CurrentMemoryContext
-------------------------------------------------------
In this proposal, pfree() and repalloc() can be applied to any chunk
Since Postgres 7.1, pfree() and repalloc() can be applied to any chunk
whether it belongs to CurrentMemoryContext or not --- the chunk's owning
context will be invoked to handle the operation, regardless. This is a
change from the old requirement that CurrentMemoryContext must be set
to the same context the memory was allocated from before one can use
pfree() or repalloc(). The old coding requirement is obviously fairly
error-prone, and will become more so the more context-switching we do;
so I think it's essential to use CurrentMemoryContext only for palloc.
We can avoid needing it for pfree/repalloc by putting restrictions on
context managers as discussed below.
pfree() or repalloc().
We could even consider getting rid of CurrentMemoryContext entirely,
There was some consideration of getting rid of CurrentMemoryContext entirely,
instead requiring the target memory context for allocation to be specified
explicitly. But I think that would be too much notational overhead ---
explicitly. But we decided that would be too much notational overhead ---
we'd have to pass an appropriate memory context to called routines in
many places. For example, the copyObject routines would need to be passed
a context, as would function execution routines that return a
......@@ -100,18 +94,27 @@ a context to use for any temporary memory allocation you might want to
do". So there'd still need to be a global variable specifying a suitable
temporary-allocation context. That might as well be CurrentMemoryContext.
The upshot of that reasoning, though, is that CurrentMemoryContext should
generally point at a short-lifespan context if at all possible. During
query execution it usually points to a context that gets reset after each
tuple. Only in *very* circumscribed code should it ever point at a
context having greater than transaction lifespan, since doing so risks
permanent memory leaks.
Additions to the Memory-Context Mechanism
-----------------------------------------
If we are going to have more contexts, we need more mechanism for keeping
track of them; else we risk leaking whole contexts under error conditions.
Before 7.1 memory contexts were all independent, but it was too hard to
keep track of them; with lots of contexts there needs to be explicit
mechanism for that.
We can do this by creating trees of "parent" and "child" contexts. When
We solved this by creating a tree of "parent" and "child" contexts. When
creating a memory context, the new context can be specified to be a child
of some existing context. A context can have many children, but only one
parent. In this way the contexts form a forest (not necessarily a single
tree, since there could be more than one top-level context).
tree, since there could be more than one top-level context; although in
current practice there is only one top context, TopMemoryContext).
We then say that resetting or deleting any particular context resets or
deletes all its direct and indirect children as well. This feature allows
......@@ -126,7 +129,7 @@ from different trees of the context forest (there are some examples
in the next section).
Actually, it turns out that resetting a given context should almost
always imply deleting (not just resetting) any child contexts it has.
always imply deleting, not just resetting, any child contexts it has.
So MemoryContextReset() means that, and if you really do want a tree of
empty contexts you need to call MemoryContextResetOnly() plus
MemoryContextResetChildren().
......@@ -138,11 +141,11 @@ of a given context, but don't reset or delete that context itself".
Globally Known Contexts
-----------------------
There will be several widely-known contexts that will typically be
referenced through global variables. At any instant the system may
contain many additional contexts, but all other contexts should be direct
or indirect children of one of these contexts to ensure they are not
leaked in event of an error.
There are a few widely-known contexts that are typically referenced
through global variables. At any instant the system may contain many
additional contexts, but all other contexts should be direct or indirect
children of one of these contexts to ensure they are not leaked in event
of an error.
TopMemoryContext --- this is the actual top level of the context tree;
every other context is a direct or indirect child of this one. Allocating
......@@ -156,17 +159,17 @@ running with CurrentMemoryContext pointing here.
PostmasterContext --- this is the postmaster's normal working context.
After a backend is spawned, it can delete PostmasterContext to free its
copy of memory the postmaster was using that it doesn't need. (Anything
that has to be passed from postmaster to backends will be passed in
TopMemoryContext. The postmaster will have only TopMemoryContext,
copy of memory the postmaster was using that it doesn't need.
(Anything that has to be passed from postmaster to backends is passed
in TopMemoryContext. The postmaster has only TopMemoryContext,
PostmasterContext, and ErrorContext --- the remaining top-level contexts
will be set up in each backend during startup.)
are set up in each backend during startup.)
CacheMemoryContext --- permanent storage for relcache, catcache, and
related modules. This will never be reset or deleted, either, so it's
not truly necessary to distinguish it from TopMemoryContext. But it
seems worthwhile to maintain the distinction for debugging purposes.
(Note: CacheMemoryContext will have child-contexts with shorter lifespans.
(Note: CacheMemoryContext has child contexts with shorter lifespans.
For example, a child context is the best place to keep the subsidiary
storage associated with a relcache entry; that way we can free rule
parsetrees and so forth easily, without having to depend on constructing
......@@ -211,12 +214,12 @@ global variable pointing to the per-portal context of the currently active
execution portal. This can be used if it's necessary to allocate storage
that will live just as long as the execution of the current portal requires.
ErrorContext --- this permanent context will be switched into for error
recovery processing, and then reset on completion of recovery. We'll
arrange to have, say, 8K of memory available in it at all times. In this
way, we can ensure that some memory is available for error recovery even
if the backend has run out of memory otherwise. This allows out-of-memory
to be treated as a normal ERROR condition, not a FATAL error.
ErrorContext --- this permanent context is switched into for error
recovery processing, and then reset on completion of recovery. We arrange
to have a few KB of memory available in it at all times. In this way, we
can ensure that some memory is available for error recovery even if the
backend has run out of memory otherwise. This allows out-of-memory to be
treated as a normal ERROR condition, not a FATAL error.
Contexts For Prepared Statements And Portals
......@@ -232,7 +235,7 @@ PortalContext when the portal is active. In the case of a portal created
by DECLARE CURSOR, this private context contains the query parse and plan
trees (there being no other object that can hold them). Portals created
from prepared statements simply reference the prepared statements' trees,
and won't actually need any storage allocated in their private contexts.
and don't actually need any storage allocated in their private contexts.
Transient Contexts During Execution
......@@ -243,7 +246,7 @@ in a temporary context that's a child of MessageContext (so that it will
go away automatically upon error). On success, the finished plan is
copied to the prepared statement's private context, and the temp context
is released; this allows planner temporary space to be recovered before
execution begins. (In simple-Query mode we'll not bother with the extra
execution begins. (In simple-Query mode we don't bother with the extra
copy step, so the planner temp space stays around till end of query.)
The top-level executor routines, as well as most of the "plan node"
......@@ -255,13 +258,13 @@ so this is appropriate for those purposes. The executor's top context
is a child of PortalContext, that is, the per-portal context of the
portal that represents the query's execution.
The main improvement needed in the executor is that expression evaluation
--- both for qual testing and for computation of targetlist entries ---
needs to not leak memory. To do this, each ExprContext (expression-eval
context) created in the executor will now have a private memory context
associated with it, and we'll arrange to switch into that context when
evaluating expressions in that ExprContext. The plan node that owns the
ExprContext is responsible for resetting the private context to empty
The main memory-management consideration in the executor is that
expression evaluation --- both for qual testing and for computation of
targetlist entries --- needs to not leak memory. To do this, each
ExprContext (expression-eval context) created in the executor has a
private memory context associated with it, and we switch into that context
when evaluating expressions in that ExprContext. The plan node that owns
the ExprContext is responsible for resetting the private context to empty
when it no longer needs the results of expression evaluations. Typically
the reset is done at the start of each tuple-fetch cycle in the plan node.
......@@ -281,13 +284,17 @@ and if the comparators leak any memory then that memory won't be recovered
till end of query. The comparator functions all return bool or int32,
so there's no problem with their result data, but there can be a problem
with leakage of internal temporary data. In particular, comparator
functions that operate on TOAST-able data types will need to be careful
functions that operate on TOAST-able data types need to be careful
not to leak detoasted versions of their inputs. This is annoying, but
it appears a lot easier to make the comparators conform than to fix the
index and sort routines, so that's what I propose to do for 7.1. Further
cleanup can be left for another day.
There will be some special cases, such as aggregate functions. nodeAgg.c
it appeared a lot easier to make the comparators conform than to fix the
index and sort routines, so that's what was done for 7.1. This remains
the state of affairs in btree and hash indexes, so btree and hash support
functions still need to not leak memory. Most of the other index AMs
have been modified to run opclass support functions in short-lived
contexts, so that leakage is not a problem; this is necessary in view
of the fact that their support functions tend to be far more complex.
There are some special cases, such as aggregate functions. nodeAgg.c
needs to remember the results of evaluation of aggregate transition
functions from one tuple cycle to the next, so it can't just discard
all per-tuple state in each cycle. The easiest way to handle this seems
......@@ -298,30 +305,20 @@ transition function.
Executor routines that switch the active CurrentMemoryContext may need
to copy data into their caller's current memory context before returning.
I think there will be relatively little need for that, because of the
convention of resetting the per-tuple context at the *start* of an
execution cycle rather than at its end. With that rule, an execution
node can return a tuple that is palloc'd in its per-tuple context, and
the tuple will remain good until the node is called for another tuple
or told to end execution. This is pretty much the same state of affairs
that exists now, since a scan node can return a direct pointer to a tuple
in a disk buffer that is only guaranteed to remain good that long.
A more common reason for copying data will be to transfer a result from
per-tuple context to per-run context; for example, a Unique node will
save the last distinct tuple value in its per-run context, requiring a
However, we have minimized the need for that, because of the convention
of resetting the per-tuple context at the *start* of an execution cycle
rather than at its end. With that rule, an execution node can return a
tuple that is palloc'd in its per-tuple context, and the tuple will remain
good until the node is called for another tuple or told to end execution.
This parallels the situation with pass-by-reference values at the table
scan level, since a scan node can return a direct pointer to a tuple in a
disk buffer that is only guaranteed to remain good that long.
A more common reason for copying data is to transfer a result from
per-tuple context to per-query context; for example, a Unique node will
save the last distinct tuple value in its per-query context, requiring a
copy step.
Another interesting special case is VACUUM, which needs to allocate
working space that will survive its forced transaction commits, yet
be released on error. Currently it does that through a "portal",
which is essentially a child context of TopMemoryContext. While that
way still works, it's ugly since xact abort needs special processing
to delete the portal. Better would be to use a context that's a child
of PortalContext and hence is certain to go away as part of normal
processing. (Eventually we might have an even better solution from
nested transactions, but this'll do fine for now.)
Mechanisms to Allow Multiple Types of Contexts
----------------------------------------------
......@@ -330,9 +327,10 @@ We may want several different types of memory contexts with different
allocation policies but similar external behavior. To handle this,
memory allocation functions will be accessed via function pointers,
and we will require all context types to obey the conventions given here.
(This is not very far different from the existing code.)
(As of 2015, there's actually still just one context type; but interest in
creating other types has never gone away entirely, so we retain this API.)
A memory context will be represented by an object like
A memory context is represented by an object like
typedef struct MemoryContextData
{
......@@ -348,7 +346,7 @@ This is essentially an abstract superclass, and the "methods" pointer is
its virtual function table. Specific memory context types will use
derived structs having these fields as their first fields. All the
contexts of a specific type will have methods pointers that point to the
same static table of function pointers, which will look like
same static table of function pointers, which look like
typedef struct MemoryContextMethodsData
{
......@@ -361,7 +359,7 @@ typedef struct MemoryContextMethodsData
Alloc, reset, and delete requests will take a MemoryContext pointer
as parameter, so they'll have no trouble finding the method pointer
to call. Free and realloc are trickier. To make those work, we will
to call. Free and realloc are trickier. To make those work, we
require all memory context types to produce allocated chunks that
are immediately preceded by a standard chunk header, which has the
layout
......@@ -372,7 +370,7 @@ typedef struct StandardChunkHeader
Size size; /* Allocated size of chunk */
};
It turns out that the existing aset.c memory context type does this
It turns out that the pre-existing aset.c memory context type did this
already, and probably any other kind of context would need to have the
same data available to support realloc, so this is not really creating
any additional overhead. (Note that if a context type needs more per-
......@@ -380,36 +378,30 @@ allocated-chunk information than this, it can make an additional
nonstandard header that precedes the standard header. So we're not
constraining context-type designers very much.)
Given this, the pfree routine will look something like
Given this, the pfree routine looks something like
StandardChunkHeader * header =
(StandardChunkHeader *) ((char *) p - sizeof(StandardChunkHeader));
(*header->mycontext->methods->free_p) (p);
We could do it as a macro, but the macro would have to evaluate its
argument twice, which seems like a bad idea (the current pfree macro
does not do that). This is already saving two levels of function call
compared to the existing code, so I think we're doing fine without
squeezing out that last little bit ...
More Control Over aset.c Behavior
---------------------------------
Currently, aset.c allocates an 8K block upon the first allocation in
a context, and doubles that size for each successive block request.
Previously, aset.c always allocated an 8K block upon the first allocation
in a context, and doubled that size for each successive block request.
That's good behavior for a context that might hold *lots* of data, and
the overhead wasn't bad when we had only a few contexts in existence.
With dozens if not hundreds of smaller contexts in the system, we will
want to be able to fine-tune things a little better.
With dozens if not hundreds of smaller contexts in the system, we need
to be able to fine-tune things a little better.
The creator of a context will be able to specify an initial block size
and a maximum block size. Selecting smaller values will prevent wastage
The creator of a context is now able to specify an initial block size
and a maximum block size. Selecting smaller values can prevent wastage
of space in contexts that aren't expected to hold very much (an example is
the relcache's per-relation contexts).
Also, it will be possible to specify a minimum context size. If this
Also, it is possible to specify a minimum context size. If this
value is greater than zero then a block of that size will be grabbed
immediately upon context creation, and cleared but not released during
context resets. This feature is needed for ErrorContext (see above),
......@@ -422,15 +414,35 @@ back to malloc() during reset, but just cleared. This avoids malloc
thrashing.
Other Notes
-----------
The original version of this proposal suggested that functions returning
pass-by-reference datatypes should be required to return a value freshly
palloc'd in their caller's memory context, never a pointer to an input
value. I've abandoned that notion since it clearly is prone to error.
In the current proposal, it is possible to discover which context a
chunk of memory is allocated in (by checking the required standard chunk
header), so nodeAgg can determine whether or not it's safe to reset
its working context; it doesn't have to rely on the transition function
to do what it's expecting.
Memory Context Reset/Delete Callbacks
-------------------------------------
A feature introduced in Postgres 9.5 allows memory contexts to be used
for managing more resources than just plain palloc'd memory. This is
done by registering a "reset callback function" for a memory context.
Such a function will be called, once, just before the context is next
reset or deleted. It can be used to give up resources that are in some
sense associated with an object allocated within the context. Possible
use-cases include
* closing open files associated with a tuplesort object;
* releasing reference counts on long-lived cache objects that are held
by some object within the context being reset;
* freeing malloc-managed memory associated with some palloc'd object.
That last case would just represent bad programming practice for pure
Postgres code; better to have made all the allocations using palloc,
in the target context or some child context. However, it could well
come in handy for code that interfaces to non-Postgres libraries.
Any number of reset callbacks can be established for a memory context;
they are called in reverse order of registration. Also, callbacks
attached to child contexts are called before callbacks attached to
parent contexts, if a tree of contexts is being reset or deleted.
The API for this requires the caller to provide a MemoryContextCallback
memory chunk to hold the state for a callback. Typically this should be
allocated in the same context it is logically attached to, so that it
will be released automatically after use. The reason for asking the
caller to provide this memory is that in most usage scenarios, the caller
will be creating some larger struct within the target context, and the
MemoryContextCallback struct can be made "for free" without a separate
palloc() call by including it in this larger struct.
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment