Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I wonder though if we ought to think about running output functions in
>> a short-lived memory context instead of the executor's main context.
>> We've considered that before, I think, and it's always been the path
>> of least resistance to fix the output functions instead --- but there
>> will always be another leak I'm afraid.
> Such is the lot of people who code in C. I worry that the number of
> memory contexts we're kicking around already is imposing a significant
> distributed overhead on the system that is hard to measure but
> nevertheless real, and that this will add to it.
Yeah, perhaps. I'd like to think that a MemoryContextReset is cheaper
than a bunch of retail pfree's, but it's hard to prove anything without
actually coding and testing it --- and on modern machines, effects like
cache locality could swamp pure instruction-count gains anyway.
Anyway, I committed the narrow fix for the moment.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
