X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A72D1B19C
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 24 Jun 2004 11:02:10 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 80190-02
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:02:09 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B063D1B18E
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 24 Jun 2004 11:02:05 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i5OE28wY013535;
	Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:02:09 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Thomas Hallgren" <thhal@mailblocks.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: bug in GUC 
In-reply-to: <cbe5q2$kpa$1@news.hub.org> 
References: <20040624052712.GA7158@dcc.uchile.cl> <cbe5q2$kpa$1@news.hub.org>
Comments: In-reply-to "Thomas Hallgren" <thhal@mailblocks.com>
	message dated "Thu, 24 Jun 2004 11:06:25 +0200"
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 10:02:08 -0400
Message-ID: <13534.1088085728@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200406/857
X-Sequence-Number: 55407

"Thomas Hallgren" <thhal@mailblocks.com> writes:
> Rather than clutter the code with the same ereport over and over again (I
> count 12 malloc's in guc.c alone), I'd like something like this:

The larger question is why it contains even one.  In general, use of
malloc in the backend is the mark of a newbie.  I'd think palloc in
TopMemoryContext would be a more suitable approach.

			regards, tom lane