util: optimize the memory usage of the read path for listInDisk

[wshwsh12]

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: ref #33877
close #35631
Problem Summary:

Optimize the memory usage of the read path for list in disk.

What is changed and how it works?

Check List

Tests

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  Workload: A big table with 5kw lines 1, a small table with 1 lines 1.
  SQL: desc analyze select * from small_table where exists (select a from v5kw big_table where small_table.b=big_table.b);
  Plan: With memory quota 1GB

[email protected]:test_xhy> desc    select * from small_table where exists (select a from v5kw big_table where small_table.b=big_table.b);
+----------------------------------+-------------+-----------+-------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| id                               | estRows     | task      | access object     | operator info                                                        |
+----------------------------------+-------------+-----------+-------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| HashJoin_15                      | 0.80        | root      |                   | semi join, equal:[eq(test_xhy.small_table.b, test_xhy.base_table.b)] |
| ├─Selection_19(Build)            | 40000000.00 | root      |                   | not(isnull(test_xhy.base_table.b))                                   |
| │ └─Limit_20                     | 50000000.00 | root      |                   | offset:0, count:50000000                                             |
| │   └─TableReader_24             | 50000000.00 | root      |                   | data:Limit_23                                                        |
| │     └─Limit_23                 | 50000000.00 | cop[tikv] |                   | offset:0, count:50000000                                             |
| │       └─TableFullScan_22       | 50000000.00 | cop[tikv] | table:base_table  | keep order:false                                                     |
| └─TableReader_18(Probe)          | 1.00        | root      |                   | data:Selection_17                                                    |
|   └─Selection_17                 | 1.00        | cop[tikv] |                   | not(isnull(test_xhy.small_table.b))                                  |
|     └─TableFullScan_16           | 1.00        | cop[tikv] | table:small_table | keep order:false, stats:pseudo                                       |
+----------------------------------+-------------+-----------+-------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
9 rows in set (0.00 sec)

Before this pr: TiDB use 60GB+ and OOM.
After this pr: We can see the GC line is 5.6GB, so the memory usage after each GC is 2.8GB

• No code

Side effects

• Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
• Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
• Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

• Affects user behaviors
• Contains syntax changes
• Contains variable changes
• Contains experimental features
• Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

None

[ti-chi-bot]

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

• XuHuaiyu
• guo-shaoge

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

[sre-bot]

Code Coverage Details: https://codecov.io/github/pingcap/tidb/commit/efa178aa521463c29cd6036b5b09e3029aca0076

[XuHuaiyu]

Add a comment for this attribute.

[guo-shaoge]

Just a quesction, chk == nil maybe unnecessary? Because sync.Pool will always new a chunk.

[wshwsh12]

Check chk==nil is more safe.. For example, the code in test cases doesn't have the sync.Pool and doesn't need to reuse.

[XuHuaiyu]

/merge

[ti-chi-bot]

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 821f656

[ti-chi-bot]

@wshwsh12: Your PR was out of date, I have automatically updated it for you.

At the same time I will also trigger all tests for you:

/run-all-tests

If the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.