On 2016-07-13 13:37:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I wonder though if we don't already have another similar use-case in > the ad-hoc "slab allocators" in reorderbuffer.c.
That seems to call more for a general slab allocator design, than for something like here. After all, there's plenty of freeing ther.e > We already know that > that code has performance issues, cf bug #14231, so I suspect there's > a redesign in its future anyway. Note that it's not the slab allocators that is having problems, it's aset.c, iterating through all allocated blocks. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
