Horton

Re: Memory leak in WAL sender with pgoutput (v10~)

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Cc: "Zhijie Hou (Fujitsu)" <houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-12-09T10:06:15Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 2:56 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I realized that this patch cannot be backpatched because it introduces a new
> > field into the public PGOutputData structure. Therefore, I think we may need to
> > use Alvaro's version [1] for the back branches.
>
> FWIW for back branches, I prefer using the foreach-pfree pattern
> Michael first proposed, just in case. It's not elegant but it can
> solve the problem while there is no risk of breaking non-core
> extensions.
>

It couldn't solve the problem completely even in back-branches. The
SQL API case I mentioned and tested by Hou-San in the email [1] won't
be solved.

[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/OS0PR01MB57166A4DA0ABBB94F2FBB28694362%40OS0PR01MB5716.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

Commits

  1. Fix memory leak in pgoutput with relation attribute map

  2. Fix memory leak in pgoutput with publication list cache

  3. Allow specifying row filters for logical replication of tables.