Re: Should we move the resowner field from JitContext to LLVMJitContext?

2024-07-19 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 01/07/2024 17:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: On 5 Jun 2024, at 10:19, Andreas Karlsson wrote: When Heikki made the resource owners extensible in commit b8bff07daa85c837a2747b4d35cd5a27e73fb7b2 the API for JIT plugins changed when ResourceOwnerForgetJIT() was moved from the generic JIT code

Re: Should we move the resowner field from JitContext to LLVMJitContext?

2024-07-01 Thread Daniel Gustafsson
> On 5 Jun 2024, at 10:19, Andreas Karlsson wrote: > When Heikki made the resource owners extensible in commit > b8bff07daa85c837a2747b4d35cd5a27e73fb7b2 the API for JIT plugins changed when > ResourceOwnerForgetJIT() was moved from the generic JIT code to the LLVM > specific JIT code so now t

Should we move the resowner field from JitContext to LLVMJitContext?

2024-06-05 Thread Andreas Karlsson
Hi, I am implementing my own JIT plugin (based on Cranelift) for PostgreSQL to learn more about the JIT and noticed an API change in PostgreSQL 17. When Heikki made the resource owners extensible in commit b8bff07daa85c837a2747b4d35cd5a27e73fb7b2 the API for JIT plugins changed when Resource