Jan Wieck <j...@wi3ck.info> writes: > In the meantime, would it be appropriate to backpatch the double linking > of memory context children at this time? I believe it has had plenty of > testing in the 9.6 cycle to be sure it didn't break anything.
I'm concerned about the ABI breakage risk from changing a data structure as fundamental as MemoryContext. Yeah, code outside utils/mmgr probably *shouldn't* be looking at that struct, but that doesn't mean it isn't. In the past we've generally only taken that sort of risk when there was no other way to fix a bug; and this patch isn't a bug fix. While this does help performance in some corner cases, I don't think it's enough of an across-the-board win to justify the risk of back-patching. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers