Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2032620.1747964904@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why our Valgrind reports suck
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > [ review ] Thanks for the comments! I'll go through them and post an updated version tomorrow. The cfbot is already nagging me for a rebase now that 0013 is moot. >> But this is the last step to get to zero reported leaks in a run of the core >> regression tests, so let's do it. > I assume that's just about the core tests, not more? I.e. I can't make skink > enable leak checking? No, we're not there yet. I've identified some other backend issues (in postgres_fdw in particular), and I've not looked at frontend programs at all. For most frontend programs, I'm dubious how much we care. Actually the big problem is I don't know what to do about plperl/plpython/pltcl. I suppose the big-hammer approach would be to put in suppression patterns covering those, at least till such time as someone has a better idea. I'm envisioning this patch series as v19 work, were you thinking we should be more aggressive? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: