Re: Google SoC--Idea Request

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Google SoC--Idea Request
Date: 2006-04-20 15:56:32
Message-ID: 19168.1145548592@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> About the only thing in the backend I found interesting was this:
> src/backend/utils/hash/dynahash.c function hash_create

I wonder if we shouldn't just remove the hash_destroy calls in
hash_create's failure paths. hash_destroy is explicitly not gonna
work on a shared-memory hashtable, and in all other cases I'd expect
that any already-allocated table structure will be in a palloc context
that will get cleaned up during error recovery.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-04-20 16:07:36 Re: pg_dump -Ft failed on Windows XP
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-04-20 15:56:29 Re: float8 regression test failure in head