On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 2:56 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I realized that this patch cannot be backpatched because it introduces a new > > field into the public PGOutputData structure. Therefore, I think we may > > need to > > use Alvaro's version [1] for the back branches. > > FWIW for back branches, I prefer using the foreach-pfree pattern > Michael first proposed, just in case. It's not elegant but it can > solve the problem while there is no risk of breaking non-core > extensions. >
It couldn't solve the problem completely even in back-branches. The SQL API case I mentioned and tested by Hou-San in the email [1] won't be solved. [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OS0PR01MB57166A4DA0ABBB94F2FBB28694362%40OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
