Re: [patch] some PQExpBuffer are not destroyed in pg_dump

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Zhang, Jie" <zhangjie2(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [patch] some PQExpBuffer are not destroyed in pg_dump
Date: 2020-04-14 01:11:56
Message-ID: 20200414011156.GD1492@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 04:51:06PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 at 11:42, Zhang, Jie <zhangjie2(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>> In getDefaultACLs function, some PQExpBuffer are not destroy
>
> Yes, it looks like an oversight. It's related to the commit
> e2090d9d20d809 which is back-patched to 9.6.
>
> The patch looks good to me.

Indeed. Any code path of pg_dump calling buildACLQueries() clears up
things, and I think that it is a better practice to clean up properly
PQExpBuffer stuff even if there is always the argument that pg_dump
is a tool running in a "short"-term context. So I will backpatch that
unless there are any objections from others.

The part I am actually rather amazed of here is that I don't recall
seeing Coverity complaining about leaks after this commit. Perhaps it
just got lost.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2020-04-14 01:32:38 Re: wrong relkind error messages
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-04-14 01:01:51 Re: pgbench - test whether a variable exists