| From: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Life cycles of tuple descriptors |
| Date: | 2021-12-15 23:20:11 |
| Message-ID: | 61BA782B.3070304@anastigmatix.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/15/21 17:50, Tom Lane wrote:
> Here's a draft patch for this. There are several places that are
> directly using DecrTupleDescRefCount after lookup_rowtype_tupdesc
> or equivalent, which'd now be forbidden. I think they are all safe
> given the assumption that the typcache's tupdescs for named composites
> are refcounted. (The calls in expandedrecord.c could be working
> with RECORD, but those code paths just checked that the tupdesc
> is refcounted.) So there's no actual bug here, and no reason to
> back-patch, but this seems like a good idea to decouple callers
> a bit more from typcache's internal logic.
I agree with the analysis at each of those sites, and the new comment
clears up everything that had puzzled me before.
Regards,
-Chap
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-12-15 23:58:59 | Re: Life cycles of tuple descriptors |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2021-12-15 23:18:04 | Re: Life cycles of tuple descriptors |