Re: Replace use malloc() & friend by memory contexts for plperl and pltcl

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Replace use malloc() & friend by memory contexts for plperl and pltcl
Date: 2016-08-31 21:30:01
Message-ID: 15147.1472679001@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Cleanup $subject has been raised a couple of times, like one year ago here:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqRxvq+Q66UFzD9wa5UAftYN4WAUADbjXKFrync96kf-VQ@mail.gmail.com
> And more recently here while working on the NULL checks for malloc():
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqR7ozfCqc6C=2+ctCcnuehTZ-vTDQ8MMhY=BQyET0Honw@mail.gmail.com

> Attached are a set of patches to replace those memory system calls by
> proper memory contexts:
> - 0001 does the cleanup work for pltcl
> - 0002 does this cleanup for plperl

I looked at 0001. It seemed to me that it wasn't that useful to add a
context unless we did something about actually freeing it; otherwise
we're just increasing the amount of memory leaked after a function
redefinition. However, it proved pretty easy to shoehorn in a refcounting
mechanism like plpgsql has, so I did that and pushed it.

Off to look at 0002 next.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2016-08-31 21:34:52 Re: [PATCH] Reload SSL certificates on SIGHUP
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2016-08-31 21:25:11 Re: _mdfd_getseg can be expensive