Re: TupleTableSlot abstraction

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: TupleTableSlot abstraction
Date: 2019-02-27 06:45:30
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-02-27 15:42:50 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:38:45PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Im not sure I understand. How can adding a memory context + reset to
> > ctas and matview receivers negatively impact other dest receivers?
> I don't think you got my point here: imagine that a plugin use the
> current receiveSlot logic from createas.c or matview.c, and forgets to
> free the tuple copied. On v11, that works fine. On current HEAD,
> they win silently a new leak.

The copy was made in intorel_receive()?

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yuzuko Hosoya 2019-02-27 06:50:39 RE: Problem with default partition pruning
Previous Message Haribabu Kommi 2019-02-27 06:44:58 Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority