| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <shiy(dot)fnst(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Table refer leak in logical replication |
| Date: | 2021-04-20 05:09:18 |
| Message-ID: | YH5h/mhFpWqHbCJY@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 09:44:05PM +0900, Amit Langote wrote:
> Okay, how about the attached then?
create_estate_for_relation() returns an extra resultRelInfo that's
also saved within es_opened_result_relations. Wouldn't is be simpler
to take the first element from es_opened_result_relations instead?
Okay, that's a nit and you are documenting things in a sufficient way,
but that just seemed duplicated to me.
> I decided to go with just
> finish_estate(), because we no longer have to do anything relation
> specific there.
Fine by me.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-04-20 05:31:18 | Re: pg_amcheck option to install extension |
| Previous Message | Yuya Watari | 2021-04-20 04:43:28 | Re: Performance Evaluation of Result Cache by using TPC-DS |