From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 616FB245C4 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 05:25:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FCOZWZTQ3dMN for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 05:25:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp46.i.mail.ru (smtp46.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id B7AED24508 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 05:25:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH v3 02/10] sql: fix leak on CREATE TABLE and resolve self ref References: <3833E5C5-1D99-442A-B0FC-101EC24E9FD7@tarantool.org> From: Vladislav Shpilevoy Message-ID: <6c253b7f-db1a-b1c9-0256-f9a62301800e@tarantool.org> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 12:25:04 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3833E5C5-1D99-442A-B0FC-101EC24E9FD7@tarantool.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Reply-To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: tarantool-patches List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org, "n.pettik" Cc: Kirill Shcherbatov Thanks for the review! I have fixed it and pushed into 2.0. On 15/06/2018 01:46, n.pettik wrote: > Nitpicking: if you can’t fit commit subject into 50 chars, > you are able to shrink it and instead write about it in commit message. > Like: > > sql: fix memory leaks > > This patch fixes several memory leaks. One of them appeared during > introducing space_def in struct Table. Name of table wasn’t released > in case of successful returning from function sqlite3StartTable(). > Second one - bla-bla-bla. > > It is only advise, tho. But I stick to the point that describing provided changes > aren’t less important then code itself. > > Patch itself looks OK to me. >