aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/pl/plpython/plpy_main.h
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* Phase 2 of pgindent updates.Tom Lane2017-06-21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Change pg_bsd_indent to follow upstream rules for placement of comments to the right of code, and remove pgindent hack that caused comments following #endif to not obey the general rule. Commit e3860ffa4dd0dad0dd9eea4be9cc1412373a8c89 wasn't actually using the published version of pg_bsd_indent, but a hacked-up version that tried to minimize the amount of movement of comments to the right of code. The situation of interest is where such a comment has to be moved to the right of its default placement at column 33 because there's code there. BSD indent has always moved right in units of tab stops in such cases --- but in the previous incarnation, indent was working in 8-space tab stops, while now it knows we use 4-space tabs. So the net result is that in about half the cases, such comments are placed one tab stop left of before. This is better all around: it leaves more room on the line for comment text, and it means that in such cases the comment uniformly starts at the next 4-space tab stop after the code, rather than sometimes one and sometimes two tabs after. Also, ensure that comments following #endif are indented the same as comments following other preprocessor commands such as #else. That inconsistency turns out to have been self-inflicted damage from a poorly-thought-through post-indent "fixup" in pgindent. This patch is much less interesting than the first round of indent changes, but also bulkier, so I thought it best to separate the effects. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/E1dAmxK-0006EE-1r@gemulon.postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/30527.1495162840@sss.pgh.pa.us
* Fix memory leaks in PL/Python.Tom Lane2015-11-05
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Previously, plpython was in the habit of allocating a lot of stuff in TopMemoryContext, and it was very slipshod about making sure that stuff got cleaned up; in particular, use of TopMemoryContext as fn_mcxt for function calls represents an unfixable leak, since we generally don't know what the called function might have allocated in fn_mcxt. This results in session-lifespan leakage in certain usage scenarios, as for example in a case reported by Ed Behn back in July. To fix, get rid of all the retail allocations in TopMemoryContext. All long-lived allocations are now made in sub-contexts that are associated with specific objects (either pl/python procedures, or Python-visible objects such as cursors and plans). We can clean these up when the associated object is deleted. I went so far as to get rid of PLy_malloc completely. There were a couple of places where it could still have been used safely, but on the whole it was just an invitation to bad coding. Haribabu Kommi, based on a draft patch by Heikki Linnakangas; some further work by me
* Run pgindent on 9.2 source tree in preparation for first 9.3Bruce Momjian2012-06-10
| | | | commit-fest.
* Create a stack of pl/python "execution contexts".Tom Lane2012-03-13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This replaces the former global variable PLy_curr_procedure, and provides a place to stash per-call-level information. In particular we create a per-call-level scratch memory context. For the moment, the scratch context is just used to avoid leaking memory from datatype output function calls in PLyDict_FromTuple. There probably will be more use-cases in future. Although this is a fix for a pre-existing memory leakage bug, it seems sufficiently invasive to not want to back-patch; it feels better as part of the major rearrangement of plpython code that we've already done as part of 9.2. Jan Urbański
* Split plpython.c into smaller piecesPeter Eisentraut2011-12-18
This moves the code around from one huge file into hopefully logical and more manageable modules. For the most part, the code itself was not touched, except: PLy_function_handler and PLy_trigger_handler were renamed to PLy_exec_function and PLy_exec_trigger, because they were not actually handlers in the PL handler sense, and it makes the naming more similar to the way PL/pgSQL is organized. The initialization of the procedure caches was separated into a new function init_procedure_caches to keep the hash tables private to plpy_procedures.c. Jan Urbański and Peter Eisentraut