On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 12:03 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> writes: > > Here's a patch. Is there a tidier way to write this? > > Hmm, I think not with the current set of primitives. We could think > about refactoring them, but that's not a job for a band-aid patch.
Thanks for looking. > > It should probably be back-patched to 17, because external code might > > use per-buffer data (obviously v17 core doesn't or skink would have > > told us this sooner). It's not a good time to push to 17 today, > > though. Push to master now to cheer skink up and 17 some time later > > when the coast is clear, or just wait? > > Agreed that right now is a bad time to push this to v17 --- we need to > keep the risk factors as low as possible for the re-release. Master > now and v17 after the re-wrap seems like the right compromise. Cool, will push to master. Melanie, could you please confirm that this patch works for you? I haven't figured out what I'm doing wrong but my local Valgrind doesn't seem to show the problem (USE_VALGRIND defined, Debian's Valgrind v3.19.0).
