On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 01:52:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I can't get too excited about this. All of the error exit paths in > backend authentication code will lead immediately to process exit, so > the possibility of some memory being leaked really has no consequences > worth worrying about. If we *were* worried about it, sprinkling a few > more ldap_msgfree() calls into the existing code would hardly make it > more bulletproof.
Even if this is not critical in the backend for this authentication path, I'd like to think that it is still a good practice for future code so as anything code-pasted around would get the call. So I see no reason to not put smth on HEAD at least. > There's lots of psprintf() and other > Postgres-universe calls in that code that could potentially fail and > force an elog exit without reaching ldap_msgfree. So if you wanted to > make this completely clean you'd need to resort to doing the freeing > in PG_CATCH blocks ... and I don't see any value in hacking it to that > extent. Agreed. I cannot get excited about going down to that in this case. > What might be worth inspecting is the code paths in frontend libpq > that call ldap_msgfree(), because on the client side we don't get to > assume that an error will lead to immediate process exit. If we've > missed any cleanups over there, that *would* be worth fixing. FWIW, I have looked at the frontend while writing my previous message and did not notice anything. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
