Re: Proposal: Limitations of palloc inside checkpointer

From: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Ekaterina Sokolova <e(dot)sokolova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposal: Limitations of palloc inside checkpointer
Date: 2025-02-28 08:13:29
Message-ID: CACG=ezbnPkZwKbQ=YrRfawrSEw0fbz7WsWohusGsE+ycHyfvvA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

After done some testing, I found a bug in the patch. If more requests were
pushed while we release the lock, num_requests could not be set to zero.

Here is a fixed version.

--
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.

Attachment Content-Type Size
v2-0001-AbsorbSyncRequests-incrementally-instead-of-doing.patch application/octet-stream 3.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Benoit Lobréau 2025-02-28 08:28:13 Re: long-standing data loss bug in initial sync of logical replication
Previous Message Ashutosh Sharma 2025-02-28 08:06:59 Re: Orphaned users in PG16 and above can only be managed by Superusers