Re: pg_walinspect memory leaks

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_walinspect memory leaks
Date: 2023-02-17 23:37:51
Message-ID: 5ae0f3e98c8d4053816d41d33a6fc372b73a09b1.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2023-02-16 at 18:00 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> I'm attaching the patches here. For HEAD, I'd
> want to be a bit defensive and use the temporary memory context for
> pg_get_wal_fpi_info() too.

I don't see why we shouldn't backpatch that, too?

Also, it seems like we should do the same thing for the loop in
GetXLogSummaryStats(). Maybe just for the outer loop is fine (the inner
loop is only 16 elements); though again, there's not an obvious
downside to fixing that, too.

--
Jeff Davis
PostgreSQL Contributor Team - AWS

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2023-02-17 23:43:44 Re: O(n) tasks cause lengthy startups and checkpoints
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2023-02-17 23:07:15 Re: Move defaults toward ICU in 16?