Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 11:56:32AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I wonder if we shouldn't just remove the hash_destroy calls in >> hash_create's failure paths. hash_destroy is explicitly not gonna >> work on a shared-memory hashtable, and in all other cases I'd expect >> that any already-allocated table structure will be in a palloc context >> that will get cleaned up during error recovery.
> Any thoughts on this? Make it a TODO item, document it, or simply > ignore it? It's like a two-line patch, so hardly worth putting in TODO ... might as well just do it. IIRC the motivation is mostly to silence a Coverity warning? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings