| To: | "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: pmmgr memory hog |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 5 Feb 2015 20:08:57 -0500 (EST) |
| Cc: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20150206004148.GB1969@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <23273355.372.1423022546978.JavaMail.rmckee@wsrmckee> <1683339037.8571387.1423176489834.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <20150205225822.GA28568@xxxxxxxxxx> <1790828395.8575235.1423177464966.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <20150205232342.GB28568@xxxxxxxxxx> <20150205233642.GA1910@xxxxxxxxxx> <1155257352.8599325.1423182027804.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <20150206004148.GB1969@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | mYRkaoLsmCou6QpKaV5eisaRAI1+OA== |
| Thread-topic: | pmmgr memory hog |
----- Original Message ----- > ... as long as that getenv() protection on config.c:215 works, so that > we leak only as many strings as there are variables in pcp.conf, I > guess that's ok. (pmGetConfig()'s documentation gives no hint that it > leaks memory, so an app would be in the right to call it many times.) You may have missed the one-trip guard before the point you are looking (see config.c:240)? The values are set in the environment so "leak" is a little misleading here too, FWLIW. cheers. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: pmmgr memory hog, Frank Ch. Eigler |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: pmmgr memory hog, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: pmmgr memory hog, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Next by Thread: | Re: pmmgr memory hog, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |