Thread: Fixing memory leak in pg_upgrade
According to Coverity, there's a memory leak bug in transfer_all_new_dbs(). mappings = gen_db_file_maps(old_db, new_db, &n_maps, old_pgdata, new_pgdata); if (n_maps) { print_maps(mappings, n_maps, new_db->db_name); #ifdef PAGE_CONVERSION pageConverter = setupPageConverter(); #endif transfer_single_new_db(pageConverter, mappings, n_maps, old_tablespace); pg_free(mappings); } -----> leaks "mappings"}return; } This is because gen_db_file_maps() allocates memory even if n_maps == 0. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> wrote: > This is because gen_db_file_maps() allocates memory even if n_maps == 0. Purely cosmetic: the initialization n_maps = 0 before the call of gen_db_file_maps is unnecessary ;) -- Michael
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> writes: > According to Coverity, there's a memory leak bug in transfer_all_new_dbs(). It's pretty difficult to get excited about that; how many table-free databases is pg_upgrade likely to see in one run? But surely we could just move the pg_free call to after the if-block. regards, tom lane
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 11:34:24AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> writes: > > According to Coverity, there's a memory leak bug in transfer_all_new_dbs(). > > It's pretty difficult to get excited about that; how many table-free > databases is pg_upgrade likely to see in one run? But surely we could > just move the pg_free call to after the if-block. I have fixed this with the attached, applied patch. I thought malloc(0) would return null, but our src/common pg_malloc() has: /* Avoid unportable behavior of malloc(0) */ if (size == 0) size = 1; so some memory is allocated, and has to be freed. I looked at avoiding the call to gen_db_file_maps() for old_db->rel_arr.nrels == 0, but there are checks in there comparing the old/new relation counts, so it can't be skipped. I also removed the unnecessary memory initialization. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
Attachment
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> wrote: >> This is because gen_db_file_maps() allocates memory even if n_maps == 0. > Purely cosmetic: the initialization n_maps = 0 before the call of > gen_db_file_maps is unnecessary ;) Of course. n_maps is written by calling gen_db_file_maps() anyway. I was talking about the case after calling gen_db_file_maps(). Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > so some memory is allocated, and has to be freed. I looked at avoiding > the call to gen_db_file_maps() for old_db->rel_arr.nrels == 0, but there > are checks in there comparing the old/new relation counts, so it can't > be skipped. I also removed the unnecessary memory initialization. Patch is fine IMO for its purpose. -- Michael