Re: Avoid memory leaks during base backups

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Cary Huang <cary(dot)huang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Avoid memory leaks during base backups
Date: 2022-10-21 06:18:14
Message-ID: Y1I5pgBLi93/burf@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 02:51:21PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 1:35 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I think elsewhere in the code we reset dangling pointers either ways -
>> before or after deleting/resetting memory context. But placing them
>> before would give us extra safety in case memory context
>> deletion/reset fails. Not sure what's the best way.
>
> I think it's OK to assume that deallocating memory will always
> succeed, so it doesn't matter whether you do it just before or just
> after that. But it's not OK to assume that *allocating* memory will
> always succeed.

AFAIK, one of the callbacks associated to a memory context could
fail, see comments before MemoryContextCallResetCallbacks() in
MemoryContextDelete(). I agree that it should not matter here, but I
think that it is better to reset the pointers before attempting the
deletion of the memory context in this case.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2022-10-21 06:28:13 Re: Avoid memory leaks during base backups
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2022-10-21 06:04:27 Re: Avoid memory leaks during base backups