From: | Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)copelandconsulting(dot)net>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Memory leaks |
Date: | 2002-10-23 06:13:53 |
Message-ID: | 20021023081353.B19465@zf.jcu.cz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 11:28:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I then moved on to psql, again, just for fun. Here, I'm thinking that I
> > started to find some other leaks...but again, I've not spent any real
> > time on it. So again, I'm not really sure it they are meaningful at
> > this point.
>
> psql might well have some internal leaks; the backend memory-context
> design doesn't apply to it.
But why? In the Mape project is used mmgr based on PostgreSQL's mmgr and
it's used for BE and FE. There is not problem with it (BTW backend is
multithread:-). IMHO use memory-context design for FE is good idea
if FE a lot works with memory. I already long time think about shared
lib with PostgreSQL mmgr...
Karel
--
Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/
C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz, http://mape.jcu.cz
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nigel J. Andrews | 2002-10-23 11:44:09 | Re: Memory leaks |
Previous Message | Philip Warner | 2002-10-23 05:41:57 | Re: pg_dump and large files - is this a problem? |