| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Memory leak in WAL sender with pgoutput (v10~) |
| Date: | 2024-12-19 17:27:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoAv8s0ZZ_mNQahPKhofQzLGmMx=BmpTXiE6W0v=Qq_8iA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 6:26 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 07:50:57AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > The difference between fix_memory_leak_v2 and fix_memory_leak_v3 is
> > that the earlier one resets the pubctx to NULL along with freeing the
> > context memory. Resetting a file-level global variable is a good idea,
> > similar to what we do for RelationSyncCache, so I prefer v2 over v3,
> > but I am fine if you would like to proceed with v3.
>
> FWIW, I am not OK with v3. I've raised this exact point a couple of
> days ago upthread:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z1t5pXsNEYwS4P5k@paquier.xyz
>
> v2 does not have these weaknesses by design.
I agree that v2 is better than v3 in terms of that.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-12-19 17:51:32 | Re: Add CASEFOLD() function. |
| Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2024-12-19 16:58:27 | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring |