From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: xmalloc => pg_malloc |
Date: | 2012-10-02 16:19:13 |
Message-ID: | 201210021819.13961.andres@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 06:02:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> While looking around to fix the pg_malloc(0) issue, I noticed that
> various other pieces of code such as pg_basebackup have essentially
> identical functions, except they're called xmalloc(). I propose to
> standardize all these things on this set of names:
>
> pg_malloc
> pg_malloc0 (for malloc-and-zero behavior)
> pg_calloc (randomly different API for pg_malloc0)
Do we need this?
> pg_realloc
> pg_free
> pg_strdup
I wonder whether the same set of functions should also be available in the
backend with ereport(EC_OUT_OF_MEMORY, ...) behaviour as well. As noted before
the are quite some malloc() calls around. Not all of them should be replaced,
but I think quite some could.
Andres
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-10-02 16:21:34 | Re: xmalloc => pg_malloc |
Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2012-10-02 16:05:49 | Re: pgsql: Disable _FORTIFY_SOURCE with ICC |