Lee Kindness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd have to disagree with regards to the memory leaks not being worth
> a mention - any such leak can cause problems when the PostgreSQL
> installation is either unattended, long-living andor has very high
> connection levels.

I don't see how.  We are talking about two strings, no more, no less,
that live for exactly the duration of the postmaster run.  Explain to me
how any of your above conditions will affect this code in the slightest?

If UnlinkLockFile ever got invoked before postmaster exit, then this
would be worth doing, and I'll accept the change as a matter of
future-proofing that routine against such use.  But on the argument of
preventing resource leakage today, this is just a waste of code space.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to