Re: Small memory fixes for pg_createsubcriber

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Small memory fixes for pg_createsubcriber
Date: 2025-02-28 01:18:53
Message-ID: Z8EO_UbPt5TGd9KJ@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 10:23:31AM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Yeah, I also think it would look good like this.

It's the least confusing option, indeed. I've reduced a bit the diffs
and done that down to v16 for the pg_upgrade part where this exists.

Double-checking the tree, it does not seem that we have simolar holes
now.. I hope that I'm not wrong.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2025-02-28 01:29:16 Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2025-02-28 00:57:56 Re: Showing primitive index scan count in EXPLAIN ANALYZE (for skip scan and SAOP scans)