| From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Guillaume Smet <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL JDBC <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Memory leaks using refcursors |
| Date: | 2007-02-19 01:09:11 |
| Message-ID: | 40EBB522-87F2-48D8-8CD6-B846006344B9@fastcrypt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Kris,
I don't see a downside to it. Once we read the data from the cursor
we have no more use for it. AFACT it should be committed.
Dave
On 18-Feb-07, at 7:20 PM, Kris Jurka wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
>> So I've sent Guillaume a driver which closes the refcursor
>> directly after reading the contents for testing.
>>
>> So far so good.
>>
>
> So what's the resolution on this? Should this fix be committed?
> What are the downsides?
>
> Kris Jurka
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kris Jurka | 2007-02-19 03:03:52 | Re: Binary protocol patch v7 |
| Previous Message | Kris Jurka | 2007-02-19 00:20:20 | Re: Memory leaks using refcursors |