Re: Consistently use palloc_object() and palloc_array()

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

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: David Geier <geidav.pg@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-12-03T00:40:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. btree_gist: Fix memory allocation formula

  2. Use palloc_object() and palloc_array(), the last change

  3. pg_buffercache: Fix memory allocation formula

  4. Fix allocation formula in llvmjit_expr.c

  5. Use palloc_object() and palloc_array() in backend code

  6. Use palloc_object() and palloc_array() in more areas of the tree

  7. Use more palloc_object() and palloc_array() in contrib/

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> It may be a good idea to split the patch into two parts, at least:
> - One for the bulk of the changes, for the straight-forward changes.
> Most of what you are suggesting are that for palloc_object and
> palloc_array which are dropped-in replacements.  Checking that these
> assemble the same before and after offers one extra layer of
> confidence.
> - Second one for the more dubious changes.

Yeah, I was thinking the same.  Some of those might perhaps be bugs
that we want to back-patch, so they need to be looked at in a
different way.

			regards, tom lane