On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 03:30:29PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote: > The multiple-calls-to-pool_clear solution is definitely safer.
OK, so now I reviewed that too ;) The only difference between: apr_pool_clear(ptrans); apr_pool_destroy(pchild); and simply: apr_pool_destroy(pchild); (given that ptrans is a child of ptrans and _destroy runs cleanups in child pools) is that it hides problems in cleanup ordering/pool nesting. I think PR 43857 is about the reslist cleanup issue in APR-util, r677505 and all that. Not sure what the status of that is. Regards, Joe
