On 2019-Mar-13, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 12:42 PM Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > I remember going over this code's memory allocation strategy a bit to > > avoid the copy while not incurring potential leaks CacheMemoryContext; > > as I recall, my idea was to use two contexts, one of which is temporary > > and used for any potentially leaky callees, and destroyed at the end of > > the function, and the other contains the good stuff and is reparented to > > CacheMemoryContext at the end. So if you have any accidental leaks, > > they don't affect a long-lived context. You have to be mindful of not > > calling leaky code when you're using the permanent one. > > Well, that assumes that the functions which allocate the good stuff do > not also leak, which seems a bit fragile.
A bit, yes, but not overly so, and it's less fragile that not having such a protection. Anything that allocates in CacheMemoryContext needs to be very careful anyway. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
