> Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > crypt_loadpwdfile() is mixing and (mis)matching memory allocation
> > protocols, trying to use pfree() to release pwd_cache vector from realloc()
>
> Didn't this just get fixed?
>
> > Fix function pointer calls to take Datum args for char and int2 args(ecgs)
>
> This still needs to be done, and it looks like a lot of tedious
> gruntwork :-(. Do we have a volunteer?
Can we throw ecps a flag to disable it from doing this until we can
address the problem more globally?
>
> I think we still have some unresolved issues about locking and about
> handling of multi-segment tables. Shouldn't those be on the TODO list?
> If they were fixed to everyone's satisfaction, it wasn't apparent from
> the list traffic...
I have heard grumbing about these, but have not seen a "Oh, I see the
problem now" report, so I am hoping someone will re-interete that it is
a problem. I have trouble telling if something is resoved. Does anyone
know of problems? My recollection is that the multi-segment stuff is
done, and the objector retracted his objection. I thought the locking
was behaving as it should. Comments?
> I am currently trying to investigate the poor performance reported by
> Edmund Mergl --- since gprof doesn't really work on my Linux box, I
> am reduced to running a profilable postmaster on my HPUX box with the
> database area NFS-mounted from the Linux box, where there is enough disk
> space for the benchmark. This setup gives new meaning to the term
> "slow", but I should be able to get a useful profile out of it. If that
> turns up anything significant and readily fixable, I might propose
> delaying 6.5 for a fix.
I can run it here. What do you want me to do?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026