"Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 7/20/07, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> It's palloc'd in the current memory context, so it's not serious.
> Right. But may be for code completeness, we should add that
> missing heap_freetuple.
Personally I've been thinking of mounting an effort to get rid of
unnecessary pfree's wherever possible. Particularly in user-defined
functions, "cleaning up" at the end is a waste of code space and
cycles too, because they're typically called in contexts that are
going to be reset immediately afterward.
In the case of vac_update_relstats, it's called only once per
transaction, so there's certainly no point in being a neatnik.
Stuff you need to worry about is functions that might be called
many times in the same memory context.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bill Moran||Date: 2007-07-20 19:28:25|
|Subject: Solved? Re: 8.2.4 signal 11 with large transaction|
|Previous:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2007-07-20 18:11:49|
|Subject: Re: 8.2.4 signal 11 with large transaction|