Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRAYx=Yo2NxCZfFR0MdR-L3ob9DQ7K3KHB1RCv3DA7-xtA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15  (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


po 29. 1. 2024 v 19:36 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> napsal:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 08:57:42AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
>
> ne 28. 1. 2024 v 19:00 odesílatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
> napsal:
>
> > Thanks for the update, smaller patches looks promising.
> >
> > Off the list Pavel has mentioned that the first two patches contain a
> > bare minimum for session variables, so I've reviewed them once more and
> > suggest to concentrate on them first. I'm afraid the memory cleanup
> > patch has to be added to the "bare minimum" set as well -- otherwise in
> > my tests it was too easy to run out of memory via creating, assigning
> > and dropping variables. Unfortunately one can't extract those three
> > patches from the series and apply only them, the memory patch would have
> > some conflicts. Can you maybe reshuffle the series to have those patches
> > (1, 2 + 8) as first three?
> >
>
> probably you need too
>
> 0006-function-pg_session_variables-for-cleaning-tests.patch and
> 0007-DISCARD-VARIABLES.patch
>
> 6 is necessary for testing of cleaning

Ok, let me take a look at those. Unless there are any objections, my
plan would be to give it a final check and mark the CF item as ready for
committer -- meaning the first 5 patches.

sure.

Thank you very much.

Pavel

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we remove -Wdeclaration-after-statement?
Next
From: "Euler Taveira"
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we remove -Wdeclaration-after-statement?