On 2013-01-08 15:45:07 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > To what extent do you want palloc et al. emulation? Provide actual pools
> > or just make redirect to malloc and provide the required symbols (at the
> > very least CurrentMemoryContext)?
> I don't see any need for memory pools, at least not for frontend
> applications of the currently envisioned levels of complexity. I concur
> with Alvaro's suggestion about just #define'ing them to malloc/free ---
> or maybe better, pg_malloc/free so that we can have a failure-checking
Unless we want to introduce those into common headers, its more complex
than #define's, you actually need to provide at least
Still seems like a shame to do that for one lonely pfree() (+ something
an eventual own implementation of relpathbackend().
> Not sure how we ought to handle elog, but maybe we can put off that bit
> of design until we have a more concrete use-case.
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2013-01-08 21:11:41|
|Subject: Re: pg_upgrade regression test litters the source tree
with log files|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2013-01-08 21:08:42|
|Subject: Re: pg_upgrade regression test litters the source tree with log files|