On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 04:07:24PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > There's something else that came to my mind: if libxml2 is loaded into > > memory indirectly because some dlopen'ed module wanted it, and then > > used, and then unloaded again because the module got dlcose'd again, > > won't you leak TLS vars unless the xmlCleanupParser() function was > > called properly before? In that case, not calling xmlCleanupParser() > > is an error, right? And calling it, too, since some other > > plugin/thread might still need it. Which means you are in a dilemma: > > in either case you are doing it wrong. > > Got it in one. libxml's API in this area is unusably broken, and needs > a ground-up redesign not random messages telling users that they didn't > use it right --- there *is* no right way to use it. > > My experience with this comes from the Postgres project, which wasted > many moons trying to use xmlMemSetup() ... basically, you can't replace > libxml's memory management, you just have to live with whatever it > chooses to leak. First time I see something coming from you or Postgres group complaining about a leak or about the use of xmlMemSetup() Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxx | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
