On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:28 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>> I have spent some time looking at your patch and testing it. This
>> looks sane. A small comment that I have would be to add an assertion
>> at the top of perform_work_item to be sure that it is called in the
>> memory context of AutovacMemCxt.
>
> Done like that, thanks for reviewing!
Thanks for considering my idea.
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers