Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 9:42 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> BTW, unless someone has changed the behavior of dynahash when I
>> wasn't looking, those MemoryContextSwitchTos shown above are useless.
> As far as I can see they are useless in this case but I think they
> might be required in case the user provides its own allocator function
> (using HASH_ALLOC). So, we can probably remove those from here?
You could imagine writing a HASH_ALLOC allocator whose behavior
varies depending on CurrentMemoryContext, but it seems like a
pretty foolish/fragile way to do it. In any case I can think of,
the hash table lives in one specific context and you really
really do not want parts of it spread across other contexts.
dynahash.c is not going to look kindly on pieces of what it
is managing disappearing from under it.
(To be clear, objects that the hash entries contain pointers to
are a different question. But the hash entries themselves have
to have exactly the same lifespan as the hash table.)
regards, tom lane