Re: Decoding speculative insert with toast leaks memory

Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> While rebasing a patch broken by 4daa140a2f5, I noticed that the patch
> does this:

> @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ enum ReorderBufferChangeType
>         REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_INTERNAL_TUPLECID,
>         REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_INTERNAL_SPEC_INSERT,
>         REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_INTERNAL_SPEC_CONFIRM,
> +       REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_INTERNAL_SPEC_ABORT,
>         REORDER_BUFFER_CHANGE_TRUNCATE
>  };

> Isn't that an undesirable ABI break for extensions?

I think it's OK in HEAD.  I agree we shouldn't do it like that
in the back branches.

            regards, tom lane