On Tue, 30 Dec 2025 at 16:25, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: > > Matthias van de Meent <[email protected]> writes: > > On Tue, 30 Dec 2025 at 15:15, Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]> wrote: > >> One thing we can perhaps do is (in assert-enabled builds) to detect > >> whether memory usage for that context has increased during > >> InitIndexAmRoutine and raise a warning if so. Then extension authors > >> would realize this and have a chance to fix it promptly. > > > Hmm, wouldn't we be able to detect changes in > > MemoryContextMemConsumed(ctx, counters) with one before and one after > > GetIndexAmRoutine(), such as included below? > > I don't think we can do this, because there are effects that the > amhandler doesn't have control over. In particular, if we have to > load its pg_proc row into syscache during fmgr_info, I don't think > that is positively guaranteed not to leak anything. (This isn't > a factor for built-in AMs, which will take the fast path in > fmgr_info, but it will be an issue for extensions.) > > I am not terribly concerned by one-time leaks of that sort, so > I don't really feel an urge to try to complain about them.
If it's difficult to filter out one-time leaks into the context caused by e.g. fmgr infra, then -indeed- it's probably not worth the effort. In which case, v3 LGTM. Kind regards, Matthias van de Meent Databricks (https://www.databricks.com)
