Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gVKom-0006ze-2W for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 18:25:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gVKoj-00038R-8S for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 18:25:37 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gVKoj-000389-1v; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 18:25:37 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gVKog-000635-3s; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 18:25:36 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id wB7IPP1r017169; Fri, 7 Dec 2018 13:25:26 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Alvaro Herrera cc: bianpan2016@163.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: BUG #15541: Use after release in PQprint In-reply-to: <20181207181524.bm7gkj4jhc6rgdmh@alvherre.pgsql> References: <20181207181524.bm7gkj4jhc6rgdmh@alvherre.pgsql> Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera message dated "Fri, 07 Dec 2018 15:15:24 -0300" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <17167.1544207125.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 13:25:25 -0500 Message-ID: <17168.1544207125@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Alvaro Herrera writes: > I wonder why don't we just remove PQprint altogether. Yeah, I was wondering that too. AFAICS the whole of fe-print.c is dead code so far as our own usage is concerned. Is there any evidence that outside code is using PQprint, PQprintTuples, or PQdisplayTuples? (The latter two aren't even documented...) Still, I'm not sure if we can remove them outright without it being considered a library compatibility break by some distros. regards, tom lane