| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Add parallelism and glibc dependent only options to reindexdb |
| Date: | 2019-07-19 00:35:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20190719003529.GB1859@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 09:45:14AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 07:46:10PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
>> Is it ok to call pg_free(slots) and let caller have a pointer pointing
> to freed memory?
>
> The interface has a Setup call which initializes the whole thing, and
> Terminate is the logical end point, so having the free logic within
> the termination looks more consistent to me. We could now have actual
> Init() and Free() but I am not sure that this justifies the move as
> this complicates the scripts using it.
I have reconsidered this point, moved the pg_free() call out of the
termination logic, and committed the first patch after an extra lookup
and more polishing.
For the second patch, could you send a rebase with a fix for the
connection slot when processing the reindex commands?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-07-19 01:09:03 | Re: pg_receivewal documentation |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2019-07-19 00:20:53 | Re: Improve search for missing parent downlinks in amcheck |