Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-30 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com 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

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-30 Thread Michael Paquier
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()

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-08 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 06/08/2015 09:04 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com 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

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-08 Thread Michael Paquier
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. But

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-08 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote: On 06/08/2015 09:04 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Fujii Masao wrote: Why don't we call

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-07 Thread Michael Paquier
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

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-05 Thread Fujii Masao
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-04 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Fujii Masao masao.fu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Since commit de768844, XLogFileCopy of xlog.c

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-04 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com wrote: Since commit de768844, XLogFileCopy of xlog.c returns to caller a pstrdup'd string that can be used afterwards for other things.

Re: [HACKERS] Memory leak with XLogFileCopy since de768844 (WAL file with .partial)

2015-06-01 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com 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