Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve documentation of tidb-server oom behavior #4477

Open
kolbe opened this issue Dec 22, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Improve documentation of tidb-server oom behavior #4477

kolbe opened this issue Dec 22, 2020 · 2 comments
Labels
lifecycle/frozen Issues with this label will not be labeled as "stale".

Comments

@kolbe
Copy link
Contributor

kolbe commented Dec 22, 2020

Change Request

This repository is ONLY used to solve issues related to DOCS.
For other issues (related to TiDB, PD, etc), please move to other repositories.

Please answer the following questions before submitting your issue. Thanks!

  1. Describe what you find is inappropriate or missing in the existing docs.

The current explanations of TiDB memory management and behavior when a query uses a large amount of memory are incomplete and confusing.

  1. Describe your suggestion or addition.

https://docs.pingcap.com/tidb/dev/configure-memory-usage discusses configuration and behavior of some options, but it does not discuss the circumstances or operation of oom-use-tmp-storage, which controls whether large operations can be "spilled" to disk.

https://docs.pingcap.com/tidb/dev/tidb-configuration-file#oom-use-tmp-storage should be updated to clarify what "some operators" means. Which operators can use temporary storage and which can't? Can the location of the temporary storage be configured? How can usage of this temporary storage be monitored?

  1. Provide some reference materials (documents, websites, etc) if you could.

@tiancaiamao reports:

  • sort and merge join and hash join may use conf.OOMUseTmpStorage
  • aggregates cannot spill to disk
@ran-huang
Copy link
Contributor

@TomShawn TomShawn added the lifecycle/frozen Issues with this label will not be labeled as "stale". label Jan 25, 2021
@TomShawn
Copy link
Contributor

TomShawn commented Mar 3, 2021

@XuHuaiyu Would you help take a look?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lifecycle/frozen Issues with this label will not be labeled as "stale".
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants