On 2019-09-30 20:16, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 2019-09-27 17:50, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> On 2019-Sep-13, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> >>> On 2019-Aug-20, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> >>>> The memory management of that seems too complicated. The "extra" >>>> mechanism of the check/assign hooks only supports one level of malloc. >>>> Using a List seems impossible. I don't know if you can safely do a >>>> malloc-ed array of malloc-ed strings either. >>> >>> Here's an idea -- have the check/assign hooks create a different >>> representation, which is a single guc_malloc'ed chunk that is made up of >>> every function name listed in the GUC, separated by \0. That can be >>> scanned at error time comparing the function name with each piece. >> >> Peter, would you like me to clean this up for commit, or do you prefer >> to keep authorship and get it done yourself? > > If you want to finish it using the idea from your previous message, > please feel free. I won't get to it this week.
I hadn't realized that you had already attached a patch that implements your idea. It looks good to me. Maybe a small comment near check_backtrace_functions() why we're not using a regular list. Other than that, please go ahead with this. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
