Re: The return value of allocate_recordbuf()

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: The return value of allocate_recordbuf()
Date: 2015-04-03 11:37:49
Message-ID: CAB7nPqT7WE_d1yUHws9mhnihsWJhw0=ZVGEEZzOX0fs=WGCiYw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Regarding the second patch, you added the checks of the return value of
> XLogReaderAllocate(). But it seems half-baked. XLogReaderAllocate() still
> uses palloc(), but don't we need to replace it with palloc_extended(), too?

Doh, you are right. I missed three places. Attached is a new patch
completing the fix.
--
Michael

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Fix-error-handling-of-XLogReaderAllocate-in-case-of-.patch text/x-diff 4.0 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Urbański 2015-04-03 11:44:31 Re: libpq's multi-threaded SSL callback handling is busted
Previous Message Etsuro Fujita 2015-04-03 11:33:04 Re: EvalPlanQual behaves oddly for FDW queries involving system columns