Re: dblink memory leak

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: dblink memory leak
Date: 2009-10-05 19:41:23
Message-ID: 18729.1254771683@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:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> No big hurry, I think, considering the leak has always been there.

> Great. It seems like this is too invasive a change to backport. My
> feeling is that not enough people have complained about this specific
> scenario to warrant the risk.

Agreed, the risk/reward ratio doesn't seem favorable for a backport.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2009-10-05 19:51:04 Re: Privileges and inheritance
Previous Message Roger Leigh 2009-10-05 19:39:42 Re: Unicode UTF-8 table formatting for psql text output