| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: leaks in TopMemoryContext? |
| Date: | 2006-01-11 14:53:42 |
| Message-ID: | 11902.1136991222@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> While I agree the problem isn't a showstopper, I think it is still
> worthy of concern: the mbutils example was chosen for being clearly
> broken, not as being the most serious instance of the problem. The issue
> might occur in *any* situation in which we're allocating memory in a
> memory context whose lifetime exceeds the current transaction -- I
> haven't looked to see what other places might need fixing.
There's very little code that runs in TopMemoryContext (by design), so
I don't think you'll find much.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-01-11 14:58:32 | Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) |
| Previous Message | Milen Kulev | 2006-01-11 14:42:32 | PG process architecture |