Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 05:13:23PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 07:50:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
It's entirely likely that ecpg's derivative of the backend's datetime
modules contains lots and lots of memory leaks, since AFAIK the
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wonder why is this? Is there some limitation to using palloc outside
> the backend itself? I ask because I have considered using it outside
> Postgres several times (a consideration that has never materialized
> yet), and I wonder if it needs somethi
On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 05:13:23PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 07:50:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > It's entirely likely that ecpg's derivative of the backend's datetime
> > > modules contains lots and lots of memory leaks, since AFAIK the
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 07:50:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > It's entirely likely that ecpg's derivative of the backend's datetime
> > modules contains lots and lots of memory leaks, since AFAIK the palloc
> > infrastructure is not there in the ecpg environment :-(.
>
>
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 07:50:46PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's entirely likely that ecpg's derivative of the backend's datetime
> modules contains lots and lots of memory leaks, since AFAIK the palloc
> infrastructure is not there in the ecpg environment :-(.
I wonder why is this? Is there som
