Re: Leaking regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ? (was: [HACKERSUninterruptable regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ?) - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Leaking regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ? (was: [HACKERSUninterruptable regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ?)
Date
Msg-id 32100.1395186092@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Leaking regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ? (was: [HACKERSUninterruptable regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ?)  (Sandro Santilli <strk@keybit.net>)
Responses Re: Leaking regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ? (was: [HACKERSUninterruptable regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ?)
List pgsql-bugs
Sandro Santilli <strk@keybit.net> writes:
> Tom: I saw you pushed a fix for the interruptability with this:
> https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/f5f21315d25ffcbfe7c6a3fa6ffaad54d31bcde0

> But we also noticed a memory leak in the regepx_replace call, did you notice
> that in your tests ? Same regexp as reported. Do you need another testcase ?

I see no memory growth while running your original example against HEAD.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: kukinek1@gmail.com
Date:
Subject: BUG #9619: error creating plperl , plperlu language , plperl.dll error
Next
From: Sergey Konoplev
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #9135: PostgreSQL doesn't want use index scan instead of (index scan+sort+limit)