Re: Memory leak somewhere at PQconnectdb?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au>
Cc: Antonio Vieiro <antonio(at)antonioshome(dot)net>, pgsql <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Memory leak somewhere at PQconnectdb?
Date: 2011-09-02 04:46:33
Message-ID: 4706.1314938793@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> writes:
> Even better, add a valgrind suppressions file for the warnings and
> ignore them. They are "leaks" only in the sense that a static variable
> is a leak, ie not at all.

Yeah, the bottom line here is that valgrind will warn about many things
that are not genuine problems. You need to learn how to judge the tool's
reports. A single allocation that is still reachable at program exit is
almost never a real problem. If it's unreachable, or there's a lot of
instances, it may be worth worrying about.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2011-09-02 05:36:25 Re: pgfoundry.org is not accessible
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-09-02 04:40:21 Re: UPDATE using query; per-row function calling problem