On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 5:59 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 12:46 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 3:27 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > 1. > > > In ReorderBufferGetCatalogChangesXacts(), isn't it better to use the > > > list length of 'catchange_txns' to allocate xids array? If we can do > > > so, then we will save the need to repalloc as well. > > > > Since ReorderBufferGetcatalogChangesXacts() collects all ongoing > > catalog modifying transactions, the length of the array could be > > bigger than the one taken last time. We can start with the previous > > length but I think we cannot remove the need for repalloc. > > > > It is using the list "catchange_txns" to form xid array which > shouldn't change for the duration of > ReorderBufferGetCatalogChangesXacts(). Then the caller frees the xid > array after its use. Next time in > ReorderBufferGetCatalogChangesXacts(), the fresh allocation for xid > array happens, so not sure why repalloc would be required?
Oops, I mistook catchange_txns for catchange->xcnt. You're right. Starting with the length of catchange_txns should be sufficient. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com/
