Re: Deferring some AtStart* allocations?

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Deferring some AtStart* allocations?
Date: 2014-10-28 14:16:42
Message-ID: 20141028141642.GO2639@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-10-24 11:25:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > What I was thinking was that you'd append the messages to the layer one
> > level deeper than the parent. Then we'd missed the invalidations when
> > rolling back the intermediate xact. But since I was quite mistaken
> > above, this isn't a problem :)
>
> So, you happy with the patch now?

Yes.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2014-10-28 14:22:38 Re: WIP: Access method extendability
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-10-28 14:06:07 Re: [WIP Patch] Using 128-bit integers for sum, avg and statistics aggregates