Re: libpq debug log

From: 'Alvaro Herrera' <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: "iwata(dot)aya(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <iwata(dot)aya(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: libpq debug log
Date: 2021-02-03 14:02:18
Message-ID: 20210203140218.GA25720@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2021-Feb-03, tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com wrote:

> From: 'Alvaro Herrera' <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
> > > + conn->fe_msg->num_fields != DEF_FE_MSGFIELDS)
>
> > The rationale for that second condition is this: if the memory allocated
> > is the initial size, we don't free memory, because it would just be
> > allocated of the same size next time, and that size is not very big, so
> > it's not a big deal if we just let it be, so that it is reused if we
> > call PQtrace() again later. However, if the allocated size is larger
> > than default, then it is possible that some previous tracing run has
> > enlarged the trace struct to a very large amount of memory, and we don't
> > want to leave that in place.
>
> Ah, understood. In that case, num_fields should be max_fields.

Oh, of course.

--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W
"Just treat us the way you want to be treated + some extra allowance
for ignorance." (Michael Brusser)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2021-02-03 14:12:14 a curious case of force_parallel_mode = on with jit'ing
Previous Message 'Alvaro Herrera' 2021-02-03 14:01:54 Re: libpq debug log