From: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Additional minor pg_dump cleanups |
Date: | 2024-07-03 11:29:15 |
Message-ID: | CAEudQAp2hFVsgQX2thwBMZLpp6_2gSh9StMHeCMRtQR+OtEo9w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em qua., 3 de jul. de 2024 às 04:37, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
escreveu:
> Re-reading Nathans recent 8213df9effaf I noticed a few more small things
> which
> can be cleaned up. In two of the get<Object> functions we lack a
> fast-path for
> when no tuples are found which leads to pg_malloc(0) calls. Another thing
> is
> that we in one place reset the PQExpBuffer immediately after creating it
> which
> isn't required.
>
0001 Looks good to me.
0002:
With the function *getPublications* I think it would be good to free up the
allocated memory?
}
+ pg_free(pubinfo);
+cleanup:
PQclear(res);
With the function *getExtensions* I think it would be good to return NULL
in case ntups = 0?
Otherwise we may end up with an uninitialized variable.
- ExtensionInfo *extinfo;
+ ExtensionInfo *extinfo = NULL;
Funny, the function *getExtensionMembership* does not use the parameter
ExtensionInfo extinfo.
getExtensions does not have another caller, Is it really necessary?
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2024-07-03 11:29:22 | Re: What is a typical precision of gettimeofday()? |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2024-07-03 11:20:10 | Re: Changing the state of data checksums in a running cluster |