On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 8:54 AM vignesh C <vignes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 04:56, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 03:36:15PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > 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
> >
> > Yeah, exactly (wanted to reply exactly that yesterday but lacked time,
> > thanks!).
>
> Yes, that makes sense. How about something like the attached patch.
>
- oldctx = MemoryContextSwitchTo(CacheMemoryContext);
- if (data->publications)
- {
- list_free_deep(data->publications);
- data->publications = NIL;
- }
+ static MemoryContext pubctx = NULL;
+
+ if (pubctx == NULL)
+ pubctx = AllocSetContextCreate(CacheMemoryContext,
+ "logical replication publication list context",
+ ALLOCSET_SMALL_SIZES);
+ else
+ MemoryContextReset(pubctx);
+
+ oldctx = MemoryContextSwitchTo(pubctx);
Considering the SQL API case, why is it okay to allocate this context
under CacheMemoryContext?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
