On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> That's a valid concern. What about the attached then? I think that it
>> is still good to keep upto to copy only data up to the switch point at
>> recovery exit. InstallXLogFileSegment()
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I'm still not sure if I should've just reverted that refactoring, to make
>> XLogFileCopy() look the same in master and back-branches, which makes
>> back-patching easier, or keep
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 06/08/2015 09:04 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
Why don't we call InstallXLogFileSegment() at the end of XL
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I'm still not sure if I should've just reverted that refactoring, to make
> XLogFileCopy() look the same in master and back-branches, which makes
> back-patching easier, or keep the refactoring, because it makes the code
> slightly nicer.
On 06/08/2015 09:04 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
Why don't we call InstallXLogFileSegment() at the end of XLogFileCopy()?
If we do that, the risk of memory leak you're worried will disappear a
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> Why don't we call InstallXLogFileSegment() at the end of XLogFileCopy()?
>> If we do that, the risk of memory leak you're worried will disappear at all.
>
> Yes, that looks fine, XLogFi
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Why don't we call InstallXLogFileSegment() at the end of XLogFileCopy()?
> If we do that, the risk of memory leak you're worried will disappear at all.
Yes, that looks fine, XLogFileCopy() would copy to a temporary file,
then install it definit
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Michael Paquier
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier
>> > wrote:
>> >> Since commit de768844, XLogFileCopy of xlog.c
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier
> > wrote:
> >> Since commit de768844, XLogFileCopy of xlog.c returns to caller a
> >> pstrdup'd string that can be used afterwards
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Since commit de768844, XLogFileCopy of xlog.c returns to caller a
>> pstrdup'd string that can be used afterwards for other things.
>> XLogFileCopy is used in only one place, and
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Since commit de768844, XLogFileCopy of xlog.c returns to caller a
> pstrdup'd string that can be used afterwards for other things.
> XLogFileCopy is used in only one place, and it happens that the result
> string is never freed at all, leak
Hi all,
Since commit de768844, XLogFileCopy of xlog.c returns to caller a
pstrdup'd string that can be used afterwards for other things.
XLogFileCopy is used in only one place, and it happens that the result
string is never freed at all, leaking memory.
Attached is a patch to fix the problem.
Rega
12 matches
Mail list logo
