Re: Memory leak from ExecutorState context?
От | Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Memory leak from ExecutorState context? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20230317091834.22e97642@karst обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Memory leak from ExecutorState context? (Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Memory leak from ExecutorState context?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi there, On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 19:51:14 +0100 Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com> wrote: > > So I guess the best thing would be to go through these threads, see what > > the status is, restart the discussion and propose what to do. If you do > > that, I'm happy to rebase the patches, and maybe see if I could improve > > them in some way. > > [...] > > > I was hoping we'd solve this by the BNL, but if we didn't get that in 4 > > years, maybe we shouldn't stall and get at least an imperfect stop-gap > > solution ... > > Indeed. So, to sum-up: > > * Patch 1 could be rebased/applied/backpatched Would it help if I rebase Patch 1 ("move BufFile stuff into separate context")? > * Patch 2 is worth considering to backpatch Same question. > * Patch 3 seemed withdrawn in favor of BNLJ > * Patch 4 is waiting for some more review and has some TODO > * discussion 5 worth few minutes to discuss before jumping on previous topics These other patches needs more discussions and hacking. They have a low priority compare to other discussions and running commitfest. However, how can avoid losing them in limbo again? Regards,
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: