Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David E. Wheeler
Subject Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0
Date
Msg-id 3816229E-1D37-48A6-8584-280139AA9171@kineticode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Jul 2, 2008, at 22:14, Tom Lane wrote:

> The "leak" is irrelevant for larger/smaller.  The only place where  
> it's
> actually useful to do PG_FREE_IF_COPY is in a btree or hash index
> support function.  In other cases you can assume that you're being
> called in a memory context that's too short-lived for it to matter.

Stupid question: for the btree index support function, is that *only*  
the function referenced in the OPERATOR CLASS, or does it also apply  
to functions that implement the operators in that class? IOW, do I  
need to worry about memory leaks in citext_eq, citext_ne, citext_gt,  
etc., or only in citext_cmp()?

Thanks,

David


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0
Next
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0