Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoadsUVCHAgetqrOAG6jc4P9VovCu7WM5NABf1SkMyGSKA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and
recovery.conf should be in it
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> PS: off topic, but isn't ParseConfigDirectory leaking the result >> of AbsoluteConfigLocation? In both normal and error paths? > > Yes, I also think it leaks in both cases and similar leak is > present in ParseConfigFile(). I have tried to fix both of these > leaks with attached patch. Committed and back-patched to 9.3. While reviewing, I noted that the "skipping missing configuration file" message in ParseConfigFile() uses an elevel of LOG, while the other messages in the same file use "elevel". I'm thinking that's a bug. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: