Thanks Michael, for looking at this.
Em sex., 11 de abr. de 2025 às 02:09, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> escreveu: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:10:02PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote: > > While it is arguable that this is a false warning, there is a benefit in > > moving the initialization of the string buffer, silencing the warnings > that > > are presented in this case. > > > > 1. pg_overexplain.c > > 2. ruleutils.c > > These code paths are far from being critical and the two ones in > ruleutils.c are older, even if it is a practice that had better be > discouraged particularly as initStringInfo() can allocate some memory > for nothing. So it could bloat the current memory context if these > code paths are repeatedly taken. > Yeah, it's a bit annoying to do unnecessary work. Plus a small gain, by delaying memory allocation until when it is actually needed. > FWIW, I'm with these changes to delay these initializations as you are > proposing. Thanks. > The RMT has a say about such changes post feature-freeze, > though, even if the one in pg_overexplain.c is new to v18. > I agree. best regards, Ranier Vilela
