Re: Safe memory allocation functions

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Safe memory allocation functions
Date: 2015-01-15 13:42:27
Message-ID: 20150115134227.GH5245@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-01-15 08:40:34 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I do think that "safe" is the wrong suffix. Maybe palloc_soft_fail()
> or palloc_null() or palloc_no_oom() or palloc_unsafe().

palloc_or_null()?

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 Merlin Moncure 2015-01-15 14:02:28 Re: hung backends stuck in spinlock heavy endless loop
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-01-15 13:40:34 Re: Safe memory allocation functions