| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands |
| Date: | 2017-09-13 04:16:52 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSi7N1dVk=sYxoBj-Arkri341ydNO5rdnoCfo1sXmbv_A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
<horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> This patch creates a new memory context "Vacuum" under
> PortalContext in vacuum.c, but AFAICS the current context there
> is PortalHeapMemory, which has the same expected lifetime with
> the new context (that is, a child of PotalContext and dropeed in
> PortalDrop). On the other hand the PortalMemory's lifetime is not
> PortalStart to PortaDrop but the backend lifetime (initialized in
> InitPostgres).
Which patch are you looking to? This introduces no new memory context,
be it in 0001 or 0002 in its last versions. I don't recall during the
successive reviews seeing that pattern as well.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-09-13 04:28:32 | Re: pg_rewind proposed scope and interface changes |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2017-09-13 04:13:16 | Re: [Proposal] Allow users to specify multiple tables in VACUUM commands |