On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think this patch might have a bug. In the existing code, >> tuplesort_gettupleslot sets should_free = true if it isn't already >> just before calling ExecStoreMinimalTuple((MinimalTuple) stup.tuple, >> slot, should_free), so it seems that ExecStoreMinimalTuple() will >> always get "true" as the fourth argument. However the patch changes >> that line of code like this: >> >> + ExecStoreMinimalTuple((MinimalTuple) stup.tuple, slot, false); >> >> So the patch seems to have the effect of changing the fourth argument >> to this call to ExecStoreMinimalTuple() from always-true to >> always-false. I might be missing something, but my guess is that's >> not right. > > There was a memory leak added by 0001-*, but then fixed by 0002-*. I > should have done more testing of 0001-* alone. Oops. > > Attached revision of 0001-* fixes this. A revised 0002-* is also > attached, just as a convenience for reviewers (they won't need to > resolve the conflict themselves).
Committed 0001. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
