Em qua., 12 de fev. de 2025 às 00:54, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> escreveu:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 01:32:32PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote: > > There is no bug. They are the same behind the scenes. I'm fine changing > it. It > > is a new code and it wouldn't cause a lot of pain to backpatch patches > in the > > future. > > On consistency grounds, and as this is documented in fe-exec.c at the > top of PQfreemem(), I can get behind the switch. > > > Even if the pg_createsubscriber aims to run in a small amount of time, > hence, > > it is fine to leak memory, the initial commit cleaned up all variables > but a > > subsequent commit 4867f8a555c apparently didn't. Although it is just a > low > > impact improvement, it is better to be strict and shut up SASTs. > > check_and_drop_existing_subscriptions() is called once per database in > setup_subscriber(), and we are not going to have millions of them in > this list. We don't usually care for such short-lived things, but as > the original commit did the effort in d44032d01463, I don't see why we > cannot do it here, either. > Thanks Michael. best regards, Ranier Vilela
