Re: Memory leaks on SRF rescan
| От | Neil Conway |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Memory leaks on SRF rescan |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1203648514.20306.76.camel@goldbach обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Memory leaks on SRF rescan (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Memory leaks on SRF rescan
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2008-02-21 at 21:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Given your point (2), is this worth fixing by itself? Right, probably not. > Yeah. I think it's hopeless to expect these functions to all hew to > the straight and narrow path. It seems to me that the right way is for > the sub-select to somehow run in its own "per-query" context. Hmm, I was thinking of just fixing this by arranging for the FuncCallContext's multi-call context to be a special context created by the function scan, and that is reset/deleted at the appropriate time. Would this not fix the issue as well? -Neil
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: