From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: hyrax vs. RelationBuildPartitionDesc |
Date: | 2019-03-13 17:38:02 |
Message-ID: | 20190313173802.GA24768@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Mar-13, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 12:42 PM Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > I remember going over this code's memory allocation strategy a bit to
> > avoid the copy while not incurring potential leaks CacheMemoryContext;
> > as I recall, my idea was to use two contexts, one of which is temporary
> > and used for any potentially leaky callees, and destroyed at the end of
> > the function, and the other contains the good stuff and is reparented to
> > CacheMemoryContext at the end. So if you have any accidental leaks,
> > they don't affect a long-lived context. You have to be mindful of not
> > calling leaky code when you're using the permanent one.
>
> Well, that assumes that the functions which allocate the good stuff do
> not also leak, which seems a bit fragile.
A bit, yes, but not overly so, and it's less fragile that not having
such a protection. Anything that allocates in CacheMemoryContext needs
to be very careful anyway.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2019-03-13 17:57:38 | Re: Timeout parameters |
Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2019-03-13 17:33:33 | RE: Timeout parameters |