On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 1:36 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Thomas Munro writes:
> > Small tidyup for commit d41a178b.
> > A comment was left behind claiming that we needed to use malloc() rather
> > than palloc() because the corresponding free would run in another
> > thread, but that's not true anymore.
Thomas Munro writes:
> Small tidyup for commit d41a178b.
> A comment was left behind claiming that we needed to use malloc() rather
> than palloc() because the corresponding free would run in another
> thread, but that's not true anymore. Remove that comment. And, with
> the reason being gone, w