| commit | f463de59d90c10f3d0daf2d5b132ca58e4111a08 | |
| author | Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> | |
| Mon, 8 Apr 2024 21:00:07 +0000 (8 17:00 -0400) | ||
| committer | Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> | |
| Mon, 8 Apr 2024 21:00:07 +0000 (8 17:00 -0400) | ||
| tree | d17294607a3ee43b7d81d1024a10ab238cfe1cb0 | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | c21d4c416ad61b78cf450f11861bbafbdfb7eebc | commitdiff |
In psql, avoid leaking a PGresult after a query is cancelled.
After a query cancel, the tail end of ExecQueryAndProcessResults
took care to clear any not-yet-read PGresults; but it forgot about
the one it has already read. There would only be such a result
when handling a multi-command string made with "\;", so that you'd
have to cancel an earlier command in such a string to reach the
bug at all. Even then, there would only be leakage of a single
PGresult per cancel, so it's not surprising nobody noticed this.
But a leak is a leak.
Noted while re-reviewing 90f517821, but this is independent of that:
it dates to 7844c9918. Back-patch to v15 where that came in.
After a query cancel, the tail end of ExecQueryAndProcessResults
took care to clear any not-yet-read PGresults; but it forgot about
the one it has already read. There would only be such a result
when handling a multi-command string made with "\;", so that you'd
have to cancel an earlier command in such a string to reach the
bug at all. Even then, there would only be leakage of a single
PGresult per cancel, so it's not surprising nobody noticed this.
But a leak is a leak.
Noted while re-reviewing 90f517821, but this is independent of that:
it dates to 7844c9918. Back-patch to v15 where that came in.
| src/bin/psql/common.c | diffblobblamehistory |