On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 2:58 AM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > > Andres Freund <[email protected]> writes: > > On 2026-02-28 01:25:12 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote: > >> Child processes do not need the postmaster's working memory context and > >> release it at the start of their main function. However, the slotsync > >> worker > >> appears to have missed this step. > > > Obviously this inconsistency is not good. However: > > I think we should consider *not* releasing postmaster memory. Freeing the > > memory actually can lead to an *increase* in memory usage and a slight > > *decrease* in connection startup performance. The reason for that is that > > with > > fork, memory allocated in postmaster is handled by copy-on-write in the > > children. > > Meh. I think that's optimizing for the wrong thing. To my mind the > point of releasing that context is to be sure that child processes > don't have access to postmaster-private data.
Okay, I've included this point in the commit message of the patch. > Admittedly, we're not > doing anything as drastic as zeroing out the memory, but it'll soon > be overwritten as the child starts up and populates its caches. Yes. Attached is a rebased version of the patch. I'm thinking to commit it. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
v2-0001-Release-postmaster-working-memory-context-in-slot.patch
Description: Binary data
