On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 01:58:33PM -0500, Reid Thompson wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-01-03 at 16:25 +0530, vignesh C wrote:
> > ...
> > The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a
> > rebased patch:
> >...
> > Regards,
> > Vignesh
>
> Per conversation in thread listed below, patches have been submitted to the "Add the ability to limit the amount of
memorythat can be allocated to backends" thread
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/bd57d9a4c219cc1392665fd5fba61dde8027b3da.camel@crunchydata.com
I suggest to close the associated CF entry.
(Also, the people who participated in this thread may want to be
included in the other thread going forward.)
> 0001-Add-tracking-of-backend-memory-allocated-to-pg_stat_.patch
> 0002-Add-the-ability-to-limit-the-amount-of-memory-that-c.patch
>
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 at 19:44, Reid Thompson
> <reid(dot)thompson(at)crunchydata(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2022-11-27 at 09:40 -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > I still wonder whether there needs to be a separate CF entry for
> > > > the 0001 patch. One issue is that there's two different lists of
> > > > people involved in the threads.
> > > >
> >
> > I'm OK with containing the conversation to one thread if everyone else
> > is. If there's no argument against, then patches after today will go
> > to the "Add the ability to limit the amount of memory that can be
> > allocated to backends" thread
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/bd57d9a4c219cc1392665fd5fba61dde8027b3da.camel@crunchydata.com
