From: | Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Coverity reports looking good |
Date: | 2006-08-20 15:48:11 |
Message-ID: | 20060820154811.GA22141@1 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 03:49:24PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> Whats basically left is a large number of memory leaks in frontend
> applications such as pg_dump, initdb, pg_ctl, etc. These haven't ever
> really been a priority (buildACLCommands is really bad in this
> respect).
> ...
> If someone wants to make a serious attempt at tackling them, I can
> provide an updated list.
If my time permits I'm willing to look into these a little bit as I now
know a little bit about Coverity reports. And since I found that these
reports not only show potential memory leaks (which I don't worry about
much in short lived frontend apps) they sometimes point to bugs that may
cause real problems.
I just had a small look at one in pg_dump.c. However, it seems the line
numbers are completely different from my CVS snapshot. Are the Coverity
reports you listed up-to-date?
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes(at)jabber(dot)org
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-20 15:52:53 | Re: Coverity reports looking good |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-20 15:31:09 | Re: pg_dump versus SERIAL, round N |