On 2019-09-30 20:16, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-09-27 17:50, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> On 2019-Sep-13, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>
>>> On 2019-Aug-20, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>>
>>>> The memory management of that seems too complicated. The "extra"
>>>> mechanism of the check/assign hooks only supports one level of malloc.
>>>> Using a List seems impossible. I don't know if you can safely do a
>>>> malloc-ed array of malloc-ed strings either.
>>>
>>> Here's an idea -- have the check/assign hooks create a different
>>> representation, which is a single guc_malloc'ed chunk that is made up of
>>> every function name listed in the GUC, separated by \0. That can be
>>> scanned at error time comparing the function name with each piece.
>>
>> Peter, would you like me to clean this up for commit, or do you prefer
>> to keep authorship and get it done yourself?
>
> If you want to finish it using the idea from your previous message,
> please feel free. I won't get to it this week.
I hadn't realized that you had already attached a patch that implements
your idea. It looks good to me. Maybe a small comment near
check_backtrace_functions() why we're not using a regular list. Other
than that, please go ahead with this.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
