Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Concern about memory management with SRFs

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Concern about memory management with SRFs
Date: 2002-08-29 01:50:41
Message-ID: 6618.1030585841@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Is it OK to use fcinfo->flinfo->fn_mcxt as the long term memory 
> context or is there a better choice?

That is the correct choice.

> Is funcctx->multi_call_memory_ctx a 
> suitable name in place of funcctx->fmctx?

No objection here.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: One WayDate: 2002-08-29 02:00:51
Subject: Re: Open 7.3 items
Previous:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2002-08-29 01:46:55
Subject: Re: Concern about memory management with SRFs

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2002-08-29 02:05:55
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] worried about PGPASSWORD drop
Previous:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2002-08-29 01:46:55
Subject: Re: Concern about memory management with SRFs

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group