Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks for large objects - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas G. Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks for large objects
Date
Msg-id 34EA859A.848FB57D@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks for large objects  (Peter T Mount <psqlhack@maidast.demon.co.uk>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter T Mount wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Feb 1998, Maurice Gittens wrote:
>
> > Ok,
> >
> > I think large objects are leaking memory because the large object functions
> > in the backend use their own GlobalMemoryContext (called Filesystem), which
> > (according to a quick grep) is never freed.
> >
> > Supposing this is true and I ensure that the large object subsystem always
> > uses the current memory context for it's memory allocations.
> >
> > What might go wrong? (Or why did the designers decide to use a
> > GlobalMemoryContext for large objects?).
> >
> > I simple don't understand why one would create a special memory context
> > for large objects without some special reason.
> > Or should I just try it and see is anything breaks?
>
> I was wondering the same thing when I was looking at that part of the code
> a couple of months back. It would be interesting to see if anything did
> break.

Does the large object I/O persist across transactions? If so, then storage would
need to be outside of the usual context, which is reset after every transaction.
Is there a place where the large object context could be freed, but is not at
the moment?

                                                          - Tom


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter T Mount
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks for large objects
Next
From: "Maurice Gittens"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks for large objects