| From: | Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Ian Harding <ianh(at)tpchd(dot)org>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Memory Errors... |
| Date: | 2002-09-20 17:57:34 |
| Message-ID: | 1032544655.3107.87.camel@mouse.copelandconsulting.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
I'll try to have a look-see by the end of the weekend. Any code that
can reproduce it or is it ANY code that uses SPI?
Greg
On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 11:39, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > On looking a little more closely, it's clear that pltcl_SPI_exec()
> > should be, and is not, calling SPI_freetuptable() once it's done with
> > the tuple table returned by SPI_exec(). This needs to be done in all
> > the non-elog code paths after SPI_exec has returned SPI_OK_SELECT.
>
> There's a note in the PL/Python documentation that it's leaking memory if
> SPI plans are used. Maybe that's related and someone could take a look at
> it.
>
> --
> Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-09-20 18:07:23 | Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-09-20 17:53:49 | Re: Win32 rename()/unlink() questions |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nigel J. Andrews | 2002-09-20 18:17:47 | Re: [GENERAL] Memory Errors... |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-09-20 16:39:26 | Re: [GENERAL] Memory Errors... |