Em sex., 11 de abr. de 2025 às 08:27, Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Thanks Michael, for looking at this. > > > Em sex., 11 de abr. de 2025 às 02:09, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> > escreveu: > >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:10:02PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote: >> > While it is arguable that this is a false warning, there is a benefit in >> > moving the initialization of the string buffer, silencing the warnings >> that >> > are presented in this case. >> > >> > 1. pg_overexplain.c >> > 2. ruleutils.c >> >> These code paths are far from being critical and the two ones in >> ruleutils.c are older, even if it is a practice that had better be >> discouraged particularly as initStringInfo() can allocate some memory >> for nothing. So it could bloat the current memory context if these >> code paths are repeatedly taken. >> > Yeah, it's a bit annoying to do unnecessary work. > Plus a small gain, by delaying memory allocation until when it is actually > needed. > Attached a new example of moving stringinfo creation, per Coverity. best regards, Ranier Vilela
postpone_string_buffer_creation_dblink.patch
Description: Binary data
