On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 13:00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz> writes:
> > i.e. either destroy the whole context if possible, and just free the
> > memory when using a shared memory context. But I'm afraid this would
> > penalize the shared memory context, because that's intended for cases
> > where all the build states coexist in parallel and then at some point
> > are all converted into a result and thrown away. Adding pfree() calls is
> > no improvement here, and just wastes cycles.
>
> FWIW, I quite dislike the terminology "shared memory context", because
> it sounds too much like it means "a context in shared memory". I see
> that the patch itself doesn't use that phrase, which is good, but can
> we come up with some other phrase for talking about it?
>
"Common memory context"?
Regards,Jeff Davis