Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> writes: >> Given that change, is there even any leak to even worry about? As long >> as the PGresult object is created in the correct memory context, it >> ought to get cleaned up automatically, no? > > No, because libpq knows nothing of backend memory contexts; it just > allocates with malloc. You'll still need a PG_TRY block to ensure you > release PGresults during error cleanup. The change to using tuplestores > will just help you localize that requirement in well-defined places.
I should have known that! Thanks for the wack on the head... >> I can't promise to make this change before 15 October, but I will get to >> it before the end of CF3. > > No big hurry, I think, considering the leak has always been there. Great. It seems like this is too invasive a change to backport. My feeling is that not enough people have complained about this specific scenario to warrant the risk. Joe
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
