JINMEI Tatuya / ...@l@C#:H wrote: > At Tue, 9 Dec 2008 15:26:25 -0500, > Vinny Abello <vi...@tellurian.com> wrote: > >> Has anybody else tried this patch for you? I haven't had time to >> look into this at all. If nobody has tried this yet, I'll get around >> to it when I can and let you know the result. > > No one else other than by myself. It worked perfectly for me, i.e., I > could reproduce the problem and I could completely eliminate the leak > with the patch. One thing I was not certain about in an off-list > discussion that led to this patch was that the patch reportedly solved > the leak only partially. I've been hoping to confirm that, but > unfortunately I've not got any followup since then. > > So, basically, I believe the problem was solved, it would also help if > you could confirm it.
Personally, I'm not convinced that it will make a difference outside of Windows. The fix is to make sure a lock gets destroyed when done and the function exits. On Windows the lock gets created and memory is allocated for it outside of the function using it and needs to be explicitly destroyed, but my understanding of pthreads was that this worked differently on Unix and the lock structure would be automatically destroyed when the function is exited since the lock was local to the function. I'd be interested in seeing the results of this. Danny _______________________________________________ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
