Re: patch: tsearch - some memory diet
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>, PostgreSQLHackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-10-06T17:48:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> I think it would be cleaner to get rid of checkTmpCtx() and instead >> have dispell_init() set up and tear down the temporary context, > > What I was thinking of doing was getting rid of the static variable > altogether: we should do what you say above, but in the form of a > state struct that's created and destroyed by additional calls from > dispell_init(). Then that state struct could also carry the > infrastructure for this additional hack. It's a little more notation to > pass an additional parameter through all these routines, but from the > standpoint of understandability and maintainability it's clearly worth > it. > >> void NISetupForDictionaryLoad(); >> void NICleanupAfterDictionaryLoad(); > > More like > > NISpellState *NISpellInit(); > NISpellTerm(NISpellState *stat); > >> ...but I don't really see why that has to be done as part of this patch. > > Because patches that reduce maintainability seldom get cleaned up after. I don't think you've made a convincing argument that this patch does that, but if you're feeling motivated to go clean this up, I'm more than happy to get out of the way. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company