On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 12:03 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> > Here's a patch. Is there a tidier way to write this?
>
> Hmm, I think not with the current set of primitives. We could think
> about refactoring them, but that's not a job for a band-aid patch.
Thanks for looking.
> > It should probably be back-patched to 17, because external code might
> > use per-buffer data (obviously v17 core doesn't or skink would have
> > told us this sooner). It's not a good time to push to 17 today,
> > though. Push to master now to cheer skink up and 17 some time later
> > when the coast is clear, or just wait?
>
> Agreed that right now is a bad time to push this to v17 --- we need to
> keep the risk factors as low as possible for the re-release. Master
> now and v17 after the re-wrap seems like the right compromise.
Cool, will push to master. Melanie, could you please confirm that
this patch works for you? I haven't figured out what I'm doing wrong
but my local Valgrind doesn't seem to show the problem (USE_VALGRIND
defined, Debian's Valgrind v3.19.0).
