| From: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Error in recent pg_dump change (coverity) |
| Date: | 2006-05-28 16:13:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20060528161334.GC22869@svana.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 12:00:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Another possibility is to just MemSet the whole PGresult struct
> to zeroes before free'ing it. Compared to the cost of obtaining
> a query result from the backend, this probably doesn't cost enough
> to be worth worrying about, and it would catch a few more problems
> of the same ilk.
Probably better actually, since by setting ntups to zero also,
PQgetvalue will return a warning (row number out of range) rather than
segfaulting...
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-28 16:19:10 | Re: Error in recent pg_dump change (coverity) |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2006-05-28 16:01:11 | Re: Error in recent pg_dump change (coverity) |