On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 11:34:27AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2022 at 12:21 AM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 1:35 PM Bharath Rupireddy >> <bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I think elsewhere in the code we reset dangling pointers either ways - >>> before or after deleting/resetting memory context. But placing them >>> before would give us extra safety in case memory context >>> deletion/reset fails. Not sure what's the best way. >> >> I think it's OK to assume that deallocating memory will always >> succeed, so it doesn't matter whether you do it just before or just >> after that. But it's not OK to assume that *allocating* memory will >> always succeed. > > Right.
To be exact, it seems to me that tablespace_map and backup_state should be reset before deleting backupcontext, but the reset of backupcontext should happen after the fact. + backup_state = NULL; tablespace_map = NULL; These two in pg_backup_start() don't matter, do they? They are reallocated a couple of lines down. + * across. We keep the memory allocated in this memory context less, What does "We keep the memory allocated in this memory context less" mean here? -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature