On 1/19/07, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
> I believe the problem is in the server's XA code somehow not closing
> unnamed parameters properly.
>
> If you could run the code I sent you and tell me if it causes a leak,
> then that will confirm it.
Sorry, I did not understand what you've asked me. I just run the test
without the XA code and it has the memory leak with the old 408
driver.
IMHO, it's quite logical as this memory leak has nothing to do with
the transaction management as all the operations are in a big
transaction.
When I close the transaction, XA or not XA, the backend used by the
connection returns to a normal memory usage.
--
Guillaume
