Re: [GENERAL] Memory Errors...

From: "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net>
Cc: PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Memory Errors...
Date: 2002-09-20 18:17:47
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0209201915200.599-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On 20 Sep 2002, Greg Copeland wrote:

> I'll try to have a look-see by the end of the weekend. Any code that
> can reproduce it or is it ANY code that uses SPI?
>
> Greg
>
>
> On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 11:39, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Tom Lane writes:
> >
> > > On looking a little more closely, it's clear that pltcl_SPI_exec()
> > > should be, and is not, calling SPI_freetuptable() once it's done with
> > > the tuple table returned by SPI_exec(). This needs to be done in all
> > > the non-elog code paths after SPI_exec has returned SPI_OK_SELECT.
> >
> > There's a note in the PL/Python documentation that it's leaking memory if
> > SPI plans are used. Maybe that's related and someone could take a look at
> > it.

I've added the call to free the tuptable just as in the pltcl patch I submited
earlier (which I can't remember if I've seen in the list so I may well resend).

However, the comments in the code imply there might be another leak with
prepared plans. I'm looking into that so I won't be sending this patch just
yet.

--
Nigel J. Andrews

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jean-Luc Lachance 2002-09-20 18:22:37 Getting acces to MVCC version number
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-09-20 18:07:23 Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-09-20 19:06:43 fix for buglet
Previous Message Greg Copeland 2002-09-20 17:57:34 Re: [GENERAL] Memory Errors...