| From: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)heterodb(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [report] memory leaks in COPY FROM on partitioned table |
| Date: | 2018-08-02 01:41:56 |
| Message-ID: | c765b9b3-f912-f2af-bdd6-cb5e142dbf04@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018/08/02 6:03, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2018-Aug-01, Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> On 2018-08-01 16:38:11 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> On 2018-Jul-24, Amit Langote wrote:
>>>
>>>> Your patch takes care of allocation happening inside
>>>> get_partition_for_tuple, but as you mention there might be others in its
>>>> caller ExecFindPartition. So, I think we should switch to the per-tuple
>>>> context in ExecFindPartition.
>>>
>>> Right, makes sense. Pushed that way.
>>
>> The buildfarm does not like this one:
>> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=desmoxytes&dt=2018-08-01%2020%3A40%3A02
>> (and a lot of other reports from my animals)
>
> Hmm, variable shadowing ...
Crap, sorry about forgetting to remove that and thanks for taking care of
that.
Thanks,
Amit
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-08-02 01:50:14 | Re: [report] memory leaks in COPY FROM on partitioned table |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2018-08-02 01:40:00 | Re: [report] memory leaks in COPY FROM on partitioned table |