Em seg., 14 de abr. de 2025 às 16:59, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> On Sun, Apr 13, 2025 at 7:34 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > CID 1608916: (#1 of 1): Resource leak (RESOURCE_LEAK) > > 52. leaked_storage: Variable buf going out of scope leaks the storage > buf.data points to. > > > > The function *record_in* has a new report about resource leak. > > I think Coverity is right. > > I agree, for small values of "right". Thanks. > The memory isn't formally leaked > because it will be eventually released when the containing memory > context is deleted, but it's unclear why we should bother to clean up > the memory in the normal path yet skip it here. I wondered whether the > existing pfree calls were added in response to some specific > complaint, but it doesn't appear so: they date back to Tom's 2004-era > commit a3704d3deca6d08013a6b1db0432b75dc6b78d28, Thanks for researching. > the commit message > for which is rather more brief than what is typical today. Still, it > seems safer to bet on the pfree being a good idea than on the reverse, > because record_in() can be called lots of times in a single > transaction. > I think that material for v18, although there were no reported concerns. best regards, Ranier Vilela
