Em seg., 9 de mar. de 2026 às 09:40, Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
escreveu:
> On 2026-Mar-09, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 11:21:35AM +0800, yangyz wrote:
> > > I think it should be modified.
> > >
> > > Move createPQExpBuffer inside the conditional block to match its
> destroy counterpart.
> > > This improves code clarity and satisfies static analyzers, even though
> the actual memory
> > > leak is minimal in practice.
> >
> > destroyPQExpBuffer() is called for each tuple from pg_database except
> > if dealing with "template{0,1}" or "postgres". It means that we would
> > just leak a few bytes for these three cases. I agree that the
> > variable declaration can be placed better, but it's really not worth
> > bothering in this context.
>
> True, but at the same time it looks as if this routine is wastefully
> written -- I mean, why spend time with a stringinfo here at all? We
> could write this in much simpler form, as in the attached, which is even
> three lines shorter. In fact, before 763aaa06f034, this is exactly how
> this routine was written, and I don't see why it was changed this way.
>
+1
LGTM.
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
>
> --
> Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E —
> https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
> "Just treat us the way you want to be treated + some extra allowance
> for ignorance." (Michael Brusser)
>
