Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
> > But freed memory is clobbered, so if we were to have an assert that
> > checks the node tag, it should show up. In fact, we do have such an
> > assert, but only for compilers other than GCC, because the inline
> > version of palloc() cannot have it fo
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> No, not really. AFAICS the reason for Alvaro not seeing it must be that
>> on his machine the new transaction happens to allocate its
>> TopTransactionContext control block right in the same place where the
>> old one was.
> But freed memory is clobber
Simon Riggs writes:
> Can we put a identifier into header of each control block, an ascending
> value that is unlikely duplicate between calls? That way we'd be able to
> tell immediately it wasn't the same block,
Same block than what? Unless you can somehow hide that ID number in
a MemoryContex
Tom Lane writes:
> Simon Riggs writes:
>> Can we add something to memory contexts to make this fail every time?
>
> No, not really. AFAICS the reason for Alvaro not seeing it must be that
> on his machine the new transaction happens to allocate its
> TopTransactionContext control block right in
Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > Can we add something to memory contexts to make this fail every time?
>
> No, not really. AFAICS the reason for Alvaro not seeing it must be that
> on his machine the new transaction happens to allocate its
> TopTransactionContext control block right in
On Sat, 2009-01-17 at 11:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > Can we add something to memory contexts to make this fail every time?
>
> No, not really. AFAICS the reason for Alvaro not seeing it must be that
> on his machine the new transaction happens to allocate its
> TopTransa
Simon Riggs writes:
> Can we add something to memory contexts to make this fail every time?
No, not really. AFAICS the reason for Alvaro not seeing it must be that
on his machine the new transaction happens to allocate its
TopTransactionContext control block right in the same place where the
old
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 18:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> What is happening is that autovacuum_do_vac_analyze contains
>
> old_cxt = MemoryContextSwitchTo(AutovacMemCxt);
> ...
> vacuum(vacstmt, relids);
> ...
> MemoryContextSwitchTo(old_cxt);
>
> and at the t
