Re: Renaming MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren to MemoryContextReset
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Renaming MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren to MemoryContextReset |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20150226223116.GI24199@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Renaming MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren to MemoryContextReset (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Renaming MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren to
MemoryContextReset
Re: Renaming MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren to MemoryContextReset Re: Renaming MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren to MemoryContextReset |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2015-02-26 17:01:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > We've discussed doing $SUBJECT off and on for nearly ten years, > the oldest thread I could find about it being here: > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1186435268.16321.37.camel@dell.linuxdev.us.dell.com > It's come up again every time we found another leak of dead child > contexts, which happened twice last year for example. And that patch > I'm pushing for "expanded" out-of-line objects really needs this to > become the default behavior anywhere that we can detoast objects. I don't object to the behavioural change per se, rather the contrary, but I find it a pretty bad idea to change the meaning of an existing functioname this way. Without a compiler erroring out people won't notice that suddenly MemoryContextReset deletes much more; leading to possibly hard to find errors. Context resets frequently are in error paths, and those won't necessarily be hit when running with assertions enabled. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: