Re: Use generation context to speed up tuplesorts

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 07, 2022 at 12:03:55PM +0100, Ronan Dunklau wrote:
> 
> (Sorry for trying to merge back the discussion on the two sides of the thread)
> 
> In  https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4776839.iZASKD2KPV%40aivenronan, I 
> expressed the idea of being able to tune glibc's malloc behaviour. 
> 
> I implemented that (patch 0001) to provide a new hook which is called on 
> backend startup, and anytime we set work_mem. This hook is # defined depending 
> on the malloc implementation: currently a default, no-op implementation is 
> provided as well as a glibc's malloc implementation.

This patch apparently misses something to have the no-op on windows:

https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4978247640285184
[03:03:01.676] Build FAILED.
[03:03:01.676]
[03:03:01.676] c:\cirrus\contrib\malloc_stats\malloc_stats.c(19,15): warning C4013: 'mallinfo2' undefined; assuming extern returning int [c:\cirrus\malloc_stats.vcxproj]
[03:03:01.676] c:\cirrus\contrib\malloc_stats\malloc_stats.c(18,19): error C2079: 'm' uses undefined struct 'mallinfo2' [c:\cirrus\malloc_stats.vcxproj]
[03:03:01.676] c:\cirrus\contrib\malloc_stats\malloc_stats.c(32,1): error C2224: left of '.arena' must have struct/union type [c:\cirrus\malloc_stats.vcxproj]
[03:03:01.676] c:\cirrus\contrib\malloc_stats\malloc_stats.c(32,1): error C2224: left of '.hblkhd' must have struct/union type [c:\cirrus\malloc_stats.vcxproj]
[03:03:01.676] c:\cirrus\contrib\malloc_stats\malloc_stats.c(32,1): error C2224: left of '.uordblks' must have struct/union type [c:\cirrus\malloc_stats.vcxproj]
[03:03:01.676] c:\cirrus\contrib\malloc_stats\malloc_stats.c(32,1): error C2224: left of '.fordblks' must have struct/union type [c:\cirrus\malloc_stats.vcxproj]
[03:03:01.676] c:\cirrus\contrib\malloc_stats\malloc_stats.c(32,1): error C2224: left of '.keepcost' must have struct/union type [c:\cirrus\malloc_stats.vcxproj]

I'm also a bit confused about which patch(es) should actually be reviewed in
that thread.  My understanding is that the original patch might not be relevant
anymore but I might be wrong.  The CF entry should probably be updated to
clarify that, with an annotation/ title change / author update or something.

In the meantime I will switch the entry to Waiting on Author.