| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com" <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix some resources leaks (src/bin/pg_basebackup/pg_createsubscriber.c) |
| Date: | 2024-04-01 17:52:03 |
| Message-ID: | 1139039.1711993923@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024, at 8:50 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>> Coverity has some reports in the new code
>> pg_createsubscriber.c
>> I think that Coverity is right.
> It depends on your "right" definition. If your program execution is ephemeral
> and the leak is just before exiting, do you think it's worth it?
I agree with Ranier, actually. The functions in question don't
exit() themselves, but return control to a caller that might or
might not choose to exit. I don't think they should be assuming
that an exit will happen promptly, even if that's true today.
The community Coverity run found a few additional leaks of the same
kind in that file. I pushed a merged fix for all of them.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2024-04-01 17:52:42 | Re: psql's FETCH_COUNT (cursor) is not being respected for CTEs |
| Previous Message | Imseih (AWS), Sami | 2024-04-01 17:45:10 | Re: Psql meta-command conninfo+ |