On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 02:01:00PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> As you would have noted I am fine with the fix on these lines but I
> suggest holding it till we conclude the memory context point raised by
> me today. It is possible that we are still leaking some memory in
> other related scenarios.
Sure. I've not seen anything else, but things are complicated enough
in this code that a path could always have been missed.
--
Michael