Oh, so this is the later version. Fine. Let me know when it is ready.
---
Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
>
>
> Okay, I've looked again at spi_exec and I believe I can fix the bug I
> introduced and the memory leak. However, I
Okay, I've looked again at spi_exec and I believe I can fix the bug I
introduced and the memory leak. However, I have only looked quickly and not
made these most recent changes to the execp version nor to the plpython
code. Therefore I am not attaching a patch at the moment, just mentioning that
On 25 Sep 2002, Neil Conway wrote:
> "Nigel J. Andrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Yes, I do get the similar results.
> >
> > A quick investigation shows that the SPI_freetuptable at the end of
> > pltcl_SPI_exec is trying to free a tuptable of value 0x82ebe64
> > (which looks sensible to m
"Nigel J. Andrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I do get the similar results.
>
> A quick investigation shows that the SPI_freetuptable at the end of
> pltcl_SPI_exec is trying to free a tuptable of value 0x82ebe64
> (which looks sensible to me) but which has a memory context of
> 0x7f7f7f7
In answer to the question posed at the end of the message below:
Yes, I do get the similar results.
A quick investigation shows that the SPI_freetuptable at the end of
pltcl_SPI_exec is trying to free a tuptable of value 0x82ebe64 (which looks
sensible to me) but which has a memory context of
