Re: patch: tsearch - some memory diet
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>, PostgreSQLHackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-10-04T06:05:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hello 2010/10/4 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>: > On Oct 3, 2010, at 7:02 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> It's not at all apparent that the code is even >> safe as-is, because it's depending on the unstated assumption that that >> static variable will get reset once per dictionary. The documentation >> is horrible: it doesn't really explain what the patch is doing, and what >> it does say is wrong. > > Yep. We certainly would need to convince ourselves that this is correct before applying it, and that is all kinds of non-obvious. > what is good documentation? This patch doesn't do more, than it removes palloc overhead on just one structure of TSearch2 ispell dictionary. It isn't related to some static variable - the most important is fact so this memory is unallocated by dropping of memory context. Regards Pavel Stehule > ...Robert