Re: [HACKERS] libpq docs about PQfreemem

2007-02-19 Thread Bruce Momjian
I have updated the PQfree documentation; patch attached. Backpatched to 8.2.X. --- Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD wrote: future for some reason. (the doc for the other functions say you have to use PQfreemem without

Re: [HACKERS] libpq docs about PQfreemem

2007-02-06 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 05:21:34PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: Magnus Hagander wrote: have this about PQfreemem(): Frees memory allocated by applicationlibpq/, particularly functionPQescapeByteaConn/function, functionPQescapeBytea/function, functionPQunescapeBytea/function,

Re: [HACKERS] libpq docs about PQfreemem

2007-02-06 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD
future for some reason. (the doc for the other functions say you have to use PQfreemem without mentioning any exceptions) Thoughts? Rip out or update? Are you saying that almost all Win32 binaries and libraries now can free across DLLs? You can under very narrow conditions. You need

Re: [HACKERS] libpq docs about PQfreemem

2007-02-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Magnus Hagander wrote: have this about PQfreemem(): Frees memory allocated by applicationlibpq/, particularly functionPQescapeByteaConn/function, functionPQescapeBytea/function, functionPQunescapeBytea/function, and functionPQnotifies/function. It is needed by Microsoft

[HACKERS] libpq docs about PQfreemem

2007-02-04 Thread Magnus Hagander
have this about PQfreemem(): Frees memory allocated by applicationlibpq/, particularly functionPQescapeByteaConn/function, functionPQescapeBytea/function, functionPQunescapeBytea/function, and functionPQnotifies/function. It is needed by Microsoft Windows, which cannot free memory

Re: [HACKERS] libpq docs about PQfreemem

2007-02-04 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Magnus Hagander wrote: Now, there are two options for this. Either we fix it (I can put together a patch), or we remove it altogether. To me, it seems to be just an implementation detail and some kind of explanation why we're doing it - which would live better in a source code comment than in

Re: [HACKERS] libpq docs about PQfreemem

2007-02-04 Thread Magnus Hagander
Peter Eisentraut wrote: Magnus Hagander wrote: Now, there are two options for this. Either we fix it (I can put together a patch), or we remove it altogether. To me, it seems to be just an implementation detail and some kind of explanation why we're doing it - which would live better in a