| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [bug fix] Memory leak in dblink |
| Date: | 2014-06-19 03:42:30 |
| Message-ID: | 12576.1403149350@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> On 06/18/2014 08:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Actually, I was wondering whether we couldn't remove that
>> CreateTupleDescCopy call entirely.
> Apparently not, at least without some additional surgery.
> ExecMakeTableFunctionResult() tries to free the tupledesc and segfaults.
Hmm ... oh, I missed this bit:
/* We must get the tupledesc from call context */
if (rsinfo && IsA(rsinfo, ReturnSetInfo) &&
rsinfo->expectedDesc != NULL)
{
result = TYPEFUNC_COMPOSITE;
if (resultTupleDesc)
*resultTupleDesc = rsinfo->expectedDesc;
/* Assume no polymorphic columns here, either */
}
So it's passing back the same tupdesc passed in by the caller of
ExecMakeTableFunctionResult. We can free that all right, but the caller
won't be happy :-(
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-06-19 03:44:31 | Re: Possible index issue on 9.5 slave |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-19 03:35:15 | Re: Possible index issue on 9.5 slave |