On 16/11/2023 01:08, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes:
>> On 09/03/2023 20:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> After further thought that seems like a pretty ad-hoc solution.
>>> We probably can do no better in the back branches, but shouldn't
>>> we start treating WaitEventSets as ResourceOwner-managed resources?
>>> Otherwise, transient WaitEventSets are going to be a permanent
>>> source of headaches.
>
>> Let's change it so that it's always allocated in TopMemoryContext, but
>> pass a ResourceOwner instead:
>> WaitEventSet *
>> CreateWaitEventSet(ResourceOwner owner, int nevents)
>> And use owner == NULL to mean session lifetime.
>
> WFM. (I didn't study your back-branch patch.)
And here is a patch to implement that on master.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)