Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> writes:
> On 09/03/2023 20:51, Tom Lane wrote:
>> After further thought that seems like a pretty ad-hoc solution.
>> We probably can do no better in the back branches, but shouldn't
>> we start treating WaitEventSets as ResourceOwner-managed resources?
>> Otherwise, transient WaitEventSets are going to be a permanent
>> source of headaches.
> Let's change it so that it's always allocated in TopMemoryContext, but
> pass a ResourceOwner instead:
> WaitEventSet *
> CreateWaitEventSet(ResourceOwner owner, int nevents)
> And use owner == NULL to mean session lifetime.
WFM. (I didn't study your back-branch patch.)
regards, tom lane
