On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 12:22 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote:
> On 16/11/2023 01:08, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> writes:
> >> On 09/03/2023 20:51, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> After further thought that seems like a pretty ad-hoc solution.
> >>> We probably can do no better in the back branches, but shouldn't
> >>> we start treating WaitEventSets as ResourceOwner-managed resources?
> >>> Otherwise, transient WaitEventSets are going to be a permanent
> >>> source of headaches.
> >
> >> Let's change it so that it's always allocated in TopMemoryContext, but
> >> pass a ResourceOwner instead:
> >> WaitEventSet *
> >> CreateWaitEventSet(ResourceOwner owner, int nevents)
> >> And use owner == NULL to mean session lifetime.
> >
> > WFM. (I didn't study your back-branch patch.)
>
> And here is a patch to implement that on master.
Rationale and code look good to me.
cfbot warns about WAIT_USE_WIN32:
[10:12:54.375] latch.c:889:2: error: ISO C90 forbids mixed
declarations and code [-Werror=declaration-after-statement]
Let's see...
WaitEvent *cur_event;
for (cur_event = set->events;
Maybe:
for (WaitEvent *cur_event = set->events;
