Horton

Re: Expand palloc/pg_malloc API

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-09-12T13:49:33Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On 09.09.22 22:13, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think serious consideration should be given to back-patching the
>> 0001 part (that is, addition of the macros).  Otherwise we'll have
>> to remember not to use these macros in code intended for back-patch,
>> and that'll be mighty annoying once we are used to them.

> Yes, the 0001 patch is kept separate so that we can do that when we feel 
> the time is right.

I think the right time is now, or at least as soon as you're
satisfied that the buildfarm is happy.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Add repalloc0 and repalloc0_array

  2. Expand palloc/pg_malloc API for more type safety

  3. Assorted examples of expanded type-safer palloc/pg_malloc API