Re: Bound memory usage during manual slot sync retries

> On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 7:03 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Okay, then let's go with a per-retry memory context approach.
> >
> > @@ -579,6 +579,8 @@ drop_local_obsolete_slots(List *remote_slot_list)
> > local_slot->data.database));
> > }
> > }
> > +
> > + list_free(local_slots);
> > }
> >
> > Why do we need this retail pfree if the caller is using memory context?
> >
>
> I see that the latest patch in email [1] has already addressed this
> point. So, I'll push the v2 version.
>
> [1] -
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABPTF7WB4Z62sPoZkhSygOCAo3OiTDLpMELxZDuwCb3HYgM_pQ%40mail.gmail.com

Thanks. My original reasoning for adding the pfree here was to act as a
safety guard in case other future callers might not manage the memory
properly. But Zhijie pointed out that this double-free pattern is not
favored in previous community discussions. I'll post the worst-case test
and its results later.

Regards,
Xuneng Zhou
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.