From: | Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: freeing LDAPMessage in CheckLDAPAuth |
Date: | 2022-09-04 10:58:06 |
Message-ID: | CALNJ-vR7HsVTFtzvktwK7PR2aTDUaJHn5fjtN=zEe4wRWBxo2w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 12:25 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 01:52:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I can't get too excited about this. All of the error exit paths in
> > backend authentication code will lead immediately to process exit, so
> > the possibility of some memory being leaked really has no consequences
> > worth worrying about. If we *were* worried about it, sprinkling a few
> > more ldap_msgfree() calls into the existing code would hardly make it
> > more bulletproof.
>
> Even if this is not critical in the backend for this authentication
> path, I'd like to think that it is still a good practice for future
> code so as anything code-pasted around would get the call. So I see
> no reason to not put smth on HEAD at least.
>
Hi,
Here is updated patch as you suggested in your previous email.
Thanks
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v2-ldap-msg-free.patch | application/octet-stream | 449 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2022-09-04 11:04:34 | TRAP: FailedAssertion("prev_first_lsn < cur_txn->first_lsn", File: "reorderbuffer.c", Line: 927, PID: 568639) |
Previous Message | Andrey Sokolov | 2022-09-04 10:49:53 | [BUG] Storage declaration in ECPG |