| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Mikhail Bautin <mbautinpgsql(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: memory leak checking |
| Date: | 2019-04-23 00:29:17 |
| Message-ID: | 1764.1555979357@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2019-04-22 16:50:25 -0700, Mikhail Bautin wrote:
>> What is the standard memory leak checking policy for the PostgreSQL
>> codebase? I know there is some support for valgrind -- is the test suite
>> being run continuously with valgrind on the build farm?
> Leaks are allowed if they are once-per-backend type things. There's no
> point in e.g. freeing information for timezone metadata, given that
> it'll be used for the whole server lifetime. And there's such things in
> psql too, IIRC.
I would not call the timezone data a "leak", since it's still useful, and
accessible from static pointers, right up to exit. A true leak for this
purpose is memory that's allocated but not usefully accessible, and I'd
say we discourage that; though small one-time leaks may not be worth the
trouble to get rid of.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2019-04-23 00:52:11 | Re: finding changed blocks using WAL scanning |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-04-23 00:13:29 | Re: finding changed blocks using WAL scanning |