For sure the (*conn)->pool is recycled more often... On Oct 17, 2013, at 3:52 PM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 4:10 PM, <j...@apache.org> wrote: > Author: jim > Date: Thu Oct 17 14:10:43 2013 > New Revision: 1533087 > > @@ -2087,12 +2089,9 @@ PROXY_DECLARE(int) ap_proxy_acquire_conn > (*conn)->close = 0; > (*conn)->inreslist = 0; > > - if (worker->s->uds) { > + if (*worker->s->uds_path) { > if ((*conn)->uds_path == NULL) { > - apr_uri_t puri; > - if (apr_uri_parse(worker->cp->pool, worker->s->name, &puri) == > APR_SUCCESS) { > - (*conn)->uds_path = apr_pstrdup(worker->cp->pool, puri.path); > - } > + (*conn)->uds_path = apr_pstrdup(worker->cp->pool, > worker->s->uds_path); > } > > Shouldn't that be either : > (*conn)->uds_path = worker->s->uds_path; > or safer : > (*conn)->uds_path = apr_pstrdup((*conn)->pool, > worker->s->uds_path); > to avoid a leak? > > Regards. >