Memory leak fixes in the connector #154
Merged
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR builds on the work of #151. See also my comment here.
Changes in this PR:
Connector
now exposes itsClose
method (done by @levakin). This PR contains the respective commits of refactor Connector to expose Close method #151.c.(io.Closer).Close()
is crucial to avoid memory leaks in the database objectClose
simplifies closing theConnector
for users, reducing the risk of leaks and increasing usabilitydb *C.duckdb_database
todb C.duckdb_database
in theConnector
because it is already a pointer (typedef struct _duckdb_database {void *__db;} * duckdb_database;
). Or was there a reason to store it as a pointer?C.duckdb_destroy_config(&config)
to more places to avoid leaksC.CString
, to the best of my knowledgeC.duckdb_set_config(config, C.CString("duckdb_api"), C.CString("go"))
C.duckdb_set_config(config, C.CString(k), C.CString(v[0]))
setConfig
, and I added explicit calls toC.free
cc @marcboeker @levakin