On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 1:54 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com> wrote: > Per Coverity. > > Coverity reports this resource leak in test_binaryheap module. > I think that is right. > > Trivial patch attached. If this were correct, we'd need to also free the memory in all the error paths. But of course, in both error and non-error paths, we rely on memory context cleanup to free memory for us, except in cases where there's some specific reason to believe that's not good enough. I doubt that there is any such reason in this case. See src/backend/utils/mmgr/README -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 1:54 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Coverity reports this resource leak in test_binaryheap module.
>> I think that is right.
> If this were correct, we'd need to also free the memory in all the
> error paths. But of course, in both error and non-error paths, we rely
> on memory context cleanup to free memory for us, except in cases where
> there's some specific reason to believe that's not good enough. I
> doubt that there is any such reason in this case.
I agree this isn't interesting from a resource-leak perspective.
However, is it interesting from a test-coverage perspective?
AFAICS, test_binaryheap doesn't presently exercise binaryheap_free,
which seems a little sad for what's supposed to be a unit-test
module.
Of course, binaryheap_free is quite trivial and we do already
have coverage of it elsewhere. So I'm not super excited about
the omission.
regards, tom lane
Сайт использует файлы cookie для корректной работы и повышения удобства. Нажимая кнопку «Принять» или продолжая пользоваться сайтом, вы соглашаетесь на их использование в соответствии с Политикой в отношении обработки cookie ООО «ППГ», в том числе на передачу данных из файлов cookie сторонним статистическим и рекламным службам. Вы можете управлять настройками cookie через параметры вашего браузера