| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Arthur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #15150: Reading uninitialised value in NISortAffixes (tsearch/spell.c) |
| Date: | 2018-04-13 17:51:00 |
| Message-ID: | 16385.1523641860@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Arthur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 06:14:03PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But I see from the code coverage report that this bit is unexercised
>> in the regression tests. Any chance of getting a test that covers
>> this? I'm worried that this means we also lack any coverage of
>> cases where the CompoundAffix array has more than one entry.
> I attached the patch. It fixes the following:
> - show an error if actual number of affix aliases is greater than
> initial number. I wonder is it necessary. But I think it is better to
> raise an error than crash, if you set wrong number for AF flag.
Good idea, but I tweaked the message wording a bit.
> The code coverage still isn't 100% for spell.c. But it is better than
> earlier.
Indeed. Pushed, thanks!
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Arthur Zakirov | 2018-04-13 19:05:30 | Re: BUG #15150: Reading uninitialised value in NISortAffixes (tsearch/spell.c) |
| Previous Message | Arthur Zakirov | 2018-04-13 11:34:48 | Re: BUG #15150: Reading uninitialised value in NISortAffixes (tsearch/spell.c) |